A Constitutional Right to an Appeal: Guarding Against Unacceptable Risks of Erroneous Conviction

Lobsenz, James E.

Journal: Seattle University Law Review

Volume: 8

First Page: 375

Year: 1985

Bluebook Citation: 8 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 375 (1985)

Author: James E. Lobsenz: all 4 publications


Abstract

The many consequences of "constitutionalizing" the right to appeal become evident only when one answers certain underlying questions about the nature of an appeal. What are the essential elements of an appeal? Why should we view the criminal defendant's right to appeal as an element of due process of law? Part II of this Article seeks to develop a theoretical due process framework for use in deciding when the right to appeal under article I, section 22 of the Washington Constitution has been unconstitutionally abridged or denied.

Part III contains an analysis of oral argument as an essential element of the right to appeal. Finally, parts IV through VII discuss some of the possible consequences flowing from the constitutionalization of the right to appeal in criminal cases.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.