NCJ Number
97414
Journal
Ohio State Law Journal Volume: 44 Issue: 2 Dated: (1983) Pages: 273-285
Date Published
1983
Length
13 pages
Annotation
This article contends that a structure and a procedure can be designed to provide a meaningful Federal review of State convictions as well as a substantial measure of finality for dispositions while eliminating inefficient, duplicated, and protracted litigation.
Abstract
It is believed these objectives can be achieved through the authorization of direct appellate review of State convictions in the existing U.S. courts of appeals or in a new Federal appellate tribunal, with careful attention given to procedural detail. Several advantages are cited for using the 12 regional courts of appeals as the primary Federal forums for reviewing State convictions; the burden would not be unduly heavy on any one Federal court, and responsibility would be placed in a Federal court in the State region where the conviction was obtained. However, growing sentiment for creation of a new Federal appellate tribunal is reported, and the main advantage of the tribunal is described: a measure of nationwide uniformity would be brought to the system whichever option is chosen, it is advised that procedures must be designed to make the appellate review coextensive in scope with the review presently available on habeas corpus. These procedures, including the vesting of the appellate court with powers to review not only the 'record,' but also the 'case,' are outlined. Benefits to be gained by the public and by the convicted defendant are addressed. Included are 37 references.