The criminal justice system, though designed to be fair and just, is not infallible. Mistakes can occur during trials that result in wrongful convictions or overly hash sentences. In such cases, post-conviction relief becomes crucial to rectify these errors and ensure that justice is served. Post-conviction encompasses various legal mechanisms that allows individuals to challenge their convictions or sentences after the conclusion of their trials. In this blog post, we will delve into the most common types of post-conviction relief and identify the key issues that often arise when seeking such relief.

The Most Common Types of Post-Conviction Relief

Common types of post-conviction relief include:

Direct Appeals

Direct appeals are the most common type of post-conviction relief. They involve challenging a conviction or sentence by appealing to a higher court, arguing that errors were made during the trial which affected the outcome. Common errors raised in direct appeals include improper jury instructions, exclusion of crucial evidence, insufficient evidence, or misconduct by the jury, prosecution or defense.

State Post-Conviction Remedies

All States provide some form of post-conviction review, which may be denominated habeas corpus, coram nobis, post-conviction relief, relief from personal restraint, or the like. In most States, the remedy is established by statute or court rules, which sometimes are based on the federal prisoner post-conviction remedy located in 28 U.S.C. §2255. The scope of post-conviction review, and the procedures by which it may be sought, vary widely from State to State. Familiarity with local rules is essential to assure exhaustion of state remedies and to avoid a procedural default barring federal habeas corpus review.

Federal Habeas Corpus Relief

Federal habeas corpus relief is the legal action through which a person in state or federal custody challenges the legality of their detention. These petitions typically focus on constitutional violations, such as ineffective assistance of counsel, newly discovered evidence, or violations of due process rights. Federal habeas corpus relief can be used by State prisoners when other forms of State relief have been exhausted, or by Federal prisoners after exhausting a direct appeal.

Post-Conviction DNA Testing

Advancements in DNA technology have led to the exoneration of numerous wrongfully convicted individuals. Post-conviction DNA testing allows defendants to present new evidence that was not available at the time of their trial. This form of relief has been instrumental in overturning convictions in cases where biological evidence was improperly handled or analyzed.

Actual Innocence Claims

In some cases, new evidence arises that directly proves the defendant’s innocence. Such evidence might include the confession of the real perpetrator or evidence discrediting witnesses from the original trial. Claims of actual innocence can be powerful tools in seeking post-conviction relief, as they challenge the very foundation of the conviction.

Common Barriers to Seeking Post-Conviction Relief

When a defendant seeks post-conviction relief, they may encounter barriers such as:

Procedural Barriers

One of the primary challenges faced when seeking post-conviction relief is navigating procedural barriers. These barriers include strict time limits for filing petitions, requirements for exhausting all available remedies, and limitations on raising new claims. Failure to adhere to these procedural rules can result in the dismissal of the petition seeking relief, leaving the defendant without recourse.

New Evidence Standard

Presenting new evidence is a common strategy in post-conviction relief cases. However, courts often apply a high standard for accepting new evidence, requiring it to be both credible and likely to have changed the outcome of the trial. This standard can make it challenging to introduce evidence that was not available during the original trial.

Striking the Balance Between Finality and Fairness

The principle of finality aims to prevent endless litigation and ensure that legal proceedings reach a definitive conclusion. However, this concept can clash with the pursuit of justice in cases where new evidence or errors come to light after the trial has concluded. Courts must carefully balance the need for finality with the imperative to correct injustices.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims

Proving ineffective assistance of counsel is complex. It requires demonstrating not only that the attorney’s performance was deficient, but also that this deficiency affected the trial’s outcome. This involves analyzing what a reasonable attorney would have done differently, and how the defendant was harmed by the attorney’s mistakes. The Supreme Court’s decision in Strickland v. Washington, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (1984) sets the requirements most states and all federal courts follow when analyzing an attorney’s effectiveness.

Hurdles in Accessing DNA Testing

While DNA evidence has revolutionized the criminal justice system, accessing post-conviction DNA testing can be challenging. Biological evidence might have been lost, contaminated, or improperly stored, making it difficult to conduct accurate testing. Additionally, legal barriers and opposition from the prosecution can hinder efforts to obtain DNA testing.

My Final Thoughts:

Post-conviction relief serves as a critical safeguard against wrongful convictions and unjust sentences. The most common forms of relief, including direct appeals, state post-conviction remedies, federal habeas corpus relief, post-conviction DNA testing, and actual innocence claims offer avenues to challenge flawed outcomes of criminal trials. However, seeking post-conviction relief is not without its challenges. Procedural barriers, the new evidence standard, the delicate balance between finality and fairness, the complexity of ineffective assistance of counsel claims, and hurdles in accessing DNA testing can all hinder the pursuit of justice.

As the legal system continues to evolve, its imperative to ensure that mechanisms for post-conviction relief remain accessible, fair, and effective. Balancing the principles of finality and fairness is an ongoing challenge, but with each exoneration of a wrongfully convicted individual, the importance of these efforts becomes even more evident. Ultimately, the pursuit of justice does not end with a conviction  it extends into the realm of post-conviction relief, where the opportunity to correct errors and protect the rights of all individuals remains a vital component of a just society.

If you, or someone you know, will be seeking post-conviction relief, our book, The Colossal Book of Criminal Citations, is an crucial tool in the pursuit of justice. Our books are in stock and ready for immediate shipping. Order your copy today, or on behalf of someone incarcerated. Our books are softcover and institution friendly.