“My lawyer didn’t do what I told them to, and I got convicted because they screwed up my defense!” must be raised by filing a Post-Conviction Relief Petition, not an Appeal.

If you are convicted or enter a guilty plea, you have the right to file an appeal if you believe that the Court made a mistake. If you believe that the lawyer made a mistake, that type of error must be raised by filing a PCR (a Post-Conviction Relief) petition. If its a Legal Issue = file an Appeal; if its a Representation Issue = file a PCR.

Everyone makes mistakes. The best lawyer in the land, still puts on their pants one leg at a time. Read any news source that you like, and you will find supposedly informed people giving their opinion as to ‘who is responsible’ for ‘what happened’, and what the outcome should be. That does not make them right, anymore than the partisan opinions offered by the talk shows, or the social media ravings of the public. What matters, is what the law says, in black and white. What matters is how the defense lawyer argued the law or the facts, and what they did while representing the client. What matters is the interpretation of the law by the Courts. The first is the job of the legislature to write laws that are clear, and to explain their intent in the legislative history that explains what the law is intended to do. The second are the actions of the defense lawyer while defending the client. The third is the explanation of the Judge as to what law is being applied to the facts of the case.

Which type of challenge needs to be raised by a defendant depends on the posture (think stage) of the case, and the basis of the issue being raised. If it is an error of the Court, you must file an appeal. If it is an error by the defense counsel, you must file a PCR petition asserting the defect in how you were represented. The fact that ‘everyone says that the lawyer screwed up’ is meaningless. It is not sufficient to merely say that the lawyer made a mistake. You must show the mistake, and show that without the mistake the outcome would have been different.

What matters when arguing in a Post-Conviction Relief proceeding, is that a lawyer’s level of representation fell below the minimum standard which a ‘reasonable lawyer’ confronting a similar situation would have handled in the same way. If the answer is NO, then the Court can hold an evidentiary hearing (one where testimony is taken from witnesses) to determine whether the Court should reverse the conviction, which if reversed puts the client back where they were before the deficient representation occurred. If the answer is YES, then the Court denies PCR relief and the defendant has the option of filing an appeal of the denial of relief.

#PCR #appeal #postconvictionrelief


The information contained in this blog post is intended as marketing, not advertising, as is more fully stated in the Disclaimer Page of this blog site. This post is strictly intended for general informational purposes only, and DOES NOT constitute legal advice on any legal matter in N.J. or in any other jurisdiction.

No attorney-client relationship is intended, offered or established by this information, even if it is similar in nature to a situation you are facing. Should you be confronted with a criminal prosecution or investigation, you are strongly advised to consult immediately with an experienced criminal defense lawyer licensed in the State or jurisdiction where the charges are filed, with whom you will have an attorney-client relationship, and can obtain legal advice on how to best handle your issues. This direct consultation should be done before you make any decisions in regards to your legal issue.

1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s