What issues Do People Raise In A Federal Criminal Appeal?

Understanding the Federal Appeal Process

A conviction in federal court doesn’t signal the end of your defense to a prosecution. However, the defense transitions from a trial to an appeal. At the appellate stage, the emphasis turns from the facts and evidence in dispute to whether the trial court correctly followed the law. As such, a Court of Appeals will not resolve factual questions. Instead, it considers only whether the trial judge failed to apply the correct legal standards to evidence, factual assertions and the conduct of the trial.

Below are some of the typical issues you might raise in a federal criminal appeal.

Sufficiency of the Evidence

Burden of Proof Requirements

The government must prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, you tell the Court of Appeals why the government failed to meet its burden of proof. You might point to the lack of eyewitness testimony or the absence of any statements or documents tying you to the criminal activity.

DEFENSE TEAM SPOTLIGHT

Todd Spodek

Lead Attorney & Founder

Featured on Netflix's "Inventing Anna," Todd Spodek brings decades of high-stakes criminal defense experience. His aggressive approach has secured dismissals and acquittals in cases others deemed unwinnable.

NY Bar Admitted Multi-State Licensed Federal Courts

Meet the Full Team

Legal Scenario: What Would You Do?

Scenario

After being convicted of mail fraud in federal court, you believe the judge gave incorrect instructions to the jury about what constitutes 'intent to defraud' and also allowed testimony from a witness that should have been excluded under the Federal Rules of Evidence. You want to challenge these errors but aren't sure what grounds you can actually raise on appeal.

What specific issues can I raise in my federal criminal appeal to try to get my conviction overturned?

Attorney's Answer

Federal criminal appeals typically center on legal errors rather than factual disputes, and the most common issues raised include improper jury instructions, erroneous evidentiary rulings under the Federal Rules of Evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment, and whether sufficient evidence supported the conviction under the standard set in Jackson v. Virginia. Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 28, your appellate brief must clearly identify each issue and explain how the error affected the outcome of your trial. It is critical that your trial attorney preserved these issues by raising timely objections, because unpreserved errors are reviewed only under the much harder 'plain error' standard established in United States v. Olano. An experienced appellate attorney can review your trial record to identify the strongest issues and craft arguments that give you the best chance of obtaining a reversal or new trial.

This is general information only. Contact us for advice specific to your situation.

The Difficulty of This Ground for Appeal

Insufficiency of the evidence is a difficult road to reversal of a conviction. The Court of Appeals views the evidence most favorably to the government. If there are conflicts in testimony, the appellate judges will (for purposes of the appeal) answer them in the prosecution’s favor. So long as the prosecution’s evidence would be enough, if accepted by the jury, then you won’t earn a reversal for lack of evidence.

Affirmative Defenses and Constitutional Protections