Criminal Defense Lawyers

Appealing Multiple Federal Convictions and Sentences

Introduction

Appealing multiple federal convictions and sentences can be a complex process, but it is an important avenue for seeking justice if you believe errors were made at trial or sentencing. This article provides an overview of the main ways to appeal federal convictions and sentences, as well as strategies and factors to consider when making these appeals.

Direct Appeal of Convictions

The most common way to appeal a federal criminal conviction is to file a direct appeal with the Court of Appeals for the circuit where the district court is located. This must be done within 14 days after entry of the judgment. The defendant essentially argues the district court made mistakes that affected the outcome of the trial – such as improperly admitting certain evidence or failing to dismiss a defective indictment.
To win on direct appeal, you must show there was a “plain error” that affected your substantial rights and seriously impacted the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of the judicial process ¹.

Plain errors are obvious mistakes that should have been caught and corrected by the trial judge. Examples could include letting in hearsay evidence that clearly violates the rules of evidence or giving improper jury instructions on the burden of proof ².
The appeals court will review the trial record but typically will not consider new evidence. It asks whether a reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on the evidence presented at trial. If errors are found, the appeals court can reverse the conviction and order a new trial. However, total reversals are rare – more often, only one or two convictions out of many are reversed if the errors were limited.

Direct Appeal of Sentence

You can also directly appeal your sentence if you believe the district court made a mistake in calculating the sentencing guidelines range or handing down the final sentence. For example, you could argue the court relied on inaccurate information about your criminal history or misapplied an enhancement or reduction under the guidelines.
On a sentencing appeal, the appeals court reviews for both procedural errors and whether the final sentence was substantively reasonable. Procedurally, the district court must properly calculate the guidelines range and adequately explain its reasoning for the chosen sentence ³.
Substantively, the sentence must be reasonable based on the factors in 18 U.S.C. §3553(a). These include the nature and seriousness of the offense, your history and characteristics, the need to promote respect for the law and provide just punishment, the need for deterrence and public protection, and the avoidance of unwarranted sentencing disparities.
If the appeals court finds procedural or substantive errors, it can vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. But it will not reverse just because it would have imposed a different sentence. As long as the sentence falls within a broad range of reasonableness, it will be upheld.

Habeas Corpus Petitions

After direct appeals are exhausted, the next option is to file a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. §2255. Often called a “2255 motion,” this allows federal prisoners to collaterally attack their conviction or sentence by arguing their constitutional rights were violated. Common claims include ineffective assistance of counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, actual innocence, or the denial of due process rights ⁴.
The bar for succeeding on habeas is higher than on direct appeal. Most procedural errors cannot be raised, and you must show the error had a “substantial and injurious effect” on the outcome. For example, to prove ineffective assistance of counsel you must show your attorney’s performance fell below objective standards of reasonableness and that it reasonably could have changed the result.
If the 2255 motion is denied by the district court that imposed the sentence, you can request a Certificate of Appealability from the circuit court to appeal the denial. This is granted if you make a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”

Strategies for Appealing Multiple Convictions and Sentences

Focus on the strongest arguments that could reasonably result in a reversal or lower sentence. Throwing in weak arguments dilutes the stronger ones.
Link related convictions together and argue errors affected all of them. For example, if there was an illegal search that impacted multiple charges, argue they should all be reversed.
Highlight sentencing disparities compared to co-defendants or similar cases, especially if they received much lower sentences. Argue this shows your sentence was substantively unreasonable.
If one count is reversed, argue the entire sentencing package has been disrupted and the case should be remanded for full resentencing on all remaining counts ⁵.
Preserve all possible issues in the direct appeal, because most cannot be raised later on habeas review. But be strategic and focus only on the strongest few issues.
Develop a personal narrative and point to mitigating factors that show why a lower sentence is justified based on your individual circumstances.

Factors That Help or Hurt Appeals

Certain factors make criminal appeals more or less likely to succeed:
Preserved Objections: If trial counsel properly objected to errors like evidentiary issues or faulty jury instructions, those have a stronger chance on appeal than things raised for the first time.
Standard of Review: The standard the appeals court uses is key. Reversals are unlikely under “plain error” or “abuse of discretion” standards where the trial judge has a lot of leeway. But questions of law are reviewed “de novo” without deference to the trial court.
Harmless Error: Most errors are subject to “harmless error” analysis, meaning you must show it impacted the outcome. If evidence against you was overwhelming, errors may be deemed harmless.
Waived Rights: If you waive important rights like a jury trial or right to counsel, it can be very hard to succeed on appeal. You gave up protections meant to ensure a fair trial.
Sentencing Disparities: Large disparities compared to co-defendants or similar cases help show your sentence was substantively unreasonable. But appeals courts still give sentencing judges wide discretion.

Conclusion

Appealing federal criminal convictions and sentences is a complex process with many procedural pitfalls. Having an experienced federal criminal appellate lawyer evaluate the trial record can help identify the best issues to raise and how to frame persuasive arguments maximizing the chance of success. With strong issues and skillful advocacy, overturning some convictions or reducing excessive sentences is possible even in challenging cases involving multiple counts.

References

1
https://www.pbwt.com/second-circuit-blog/concurrent-sentence-doctrine-alive-and-well-for-collateral-review

2
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-49_d18e.pdf

3
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6056&context=jclc

4
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/10/16/us-appeals-proud-boys-sentences/

5
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/prosecutors-are-appealing-length-of-prison-sentences-for-proud-boys-leaders-convicted-of-jan-6-plot