Appellate courts address legal questions rather than factual ones

Evidence

After sentencing von Biilow to 30 years in prison, the trial judge commented, “The Trial of Claus von Biilow is over. The Trial of the Trial Judge is about to begin.” And so it was. Proclaiming his innocence, Claus von Biilow appealed his conviction to the Rhode Island Supreme Court. Newly hired to represent him on appeal was Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard professor and celebrated defense attorney. Although appellate courts focus on legal rather than factual questions, Dershow- itz was convinced that the Rhode Island court would not overturn von Biilow’s conviction unless the justices had some indication that his client was innocent. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1247

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Names the standard-of-review distinction between trial and appellate courts, a foundational concept for the course’s treatment of judicial structure.
  • XREF: Connects to the trial-court fact-finding posts from earlier chapters — appellate review presupposes a factual record made below. — connects to: Appellate courts review lower rulings and decide by written opinions. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 571; Trial courts establish facts while appellate courts review trial procedures only. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 786; Trial and appellate courts perform distinct functions regarding facts versus legal correctness — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 218 (+10 more)

Broader Connections