POST-TRIAL PROTECTIONS

The post-trial stages include: sentencing of the convicted criminal, appeal from judgment, and enforcement of judgment. Some of the due process protections already discussed apply equally to the trial stage (right to counsel, protection against double jeopardy, and the right to unbiased judge). Among the other post-trial due process protections available to the criminal defendant are the following:

Prohibition Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Right to Appeal

Right of Habeas Corpus

 

PROHIBITION AGAINST CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT

The Eighth Amendmentprohibits the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment upon persons convicted of the commission of a crime. The prohibition applies to both the method of punishment, as well as to the severity of punishment itself.

The purpose of American criminal punishment is not to torture or inflict physical pain upon convicted criminal.

Under the prevailing American law today the following punishment are deemed to be cruel and unusual: punishment that amounts to torture; punishment that is grossly excessive in proportion to the offense for which it is imposed; punishment that is inherently unfair (e.g. deprivation of U.S. Citizenship), punishment that is unnecessarily degrading; and punishment that is shocking to people of reasonable sensitivity (sterilization of convicted criminal).

The concept of cruel and unusual punishment is not static. It is dynamic and is influenced by political, cultural and historical factors. Thus, what is considered to be permissible punishment today may be held unconstitutionally cruel and unusual in the years to come.

Under the present American standards, the death penalty per se is not considered to be cruel and unusual punishment. The constitutionally permissible methods of executing capital punishment are: death by hanging, shooting by firing squad, use of lethal gas, electrocution, and killing by injection.

The Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment has been applied also to the treatment of prisoners in both federal and state prisons. Thus it has been held to be unconstitutional to do any of the following things to prisoners: to treat inmates with persistent and deliberate cruelty, to brutally mistreat inmates, to hold inmates in particularly gruesome conditions, to deny inmates reasonable medical care.

 

RIGHT TO APPEAL

An appeal asks a higher court to review the actions of a lower court in order to correct mistakes or injustices. Appellate review represents the defendant's last chance to obtain review of unfavorable decision of a trial court. This right is not strictly constitutional. However, the Supreme Court of the U.S. has held that this right to appeal has become constitutionalized because all states have passed laws recognizing this right.

In American law, the criminal defendant is entitled to at least one appellate review. Appeals are discretionary, that is, the losing party is not required to seek appellate court review. The lone exception involves capital punishment cases. When a jury imposes a sentence of death, the case must be appealed regardless of the defendant's wishes.

Appeals are restricted to questions of law; findings of fact are not appealable. Thus, appellate courts don't hear new testimony and don't consider new evidence. Rather they focus on how decisions were made in the trial court, basing their review on the trial court record. Questions of law that are commonly raised on appeal include defects in jury selection, improper admission of evidence during the trial, incompetent assistance of counsel, and mistaken interpretations of the law. The appellant may also claim constitutional violations, including illegal search and seizure, improper questioning of the defendant by the police, or the identification of the defendant through a defective lineup.

Appeals are also confined to issues properly raised in the trial court. During trial, attorneys must make timely objections to the judge's rulings on points of law. When an attorney makes such objections, and the trial judge overrules it, there is a disagreement over a point of law and the issue has been preserved for appeal.

An indigent defendant who wants to appeal unfavorable decision of the trial court has the right to have attorney appointed to handle his/her first appeal.

 

THE RIGHT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Habeas corpus is a Latin term that literally means "you have the body - the body being that of the suspect or criminal. It is defined as a writ directed to a sheriff or other person detaining another, commanding him or her to produce the body of the prisoner at a certain time and place and to report the day and cause of the prisoner's taking and detention to the judge awarding the writ. Habeas corpus is the remedy against any type of illegal restraint by a government official.

Habeas corpus proceedings have their basis in Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, which provides that "the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Case of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Anyone who is unconstitutionally held in custody may file habeas corpus. The writ may be used as a pre-trial relief and as post-conviction relief. It may be filed any time a prisoner establishes (or thinks he or she can establish) that his constitutional rights have been violated. The rights prisoners usually invoke in habeas corpus proceedings are the protection against unreasonable search and seizure, the exclusionary rule, privilege against self-incrimination, the right to an attorney, the protection against double jeopardy, and the right to due process of law. A person who has been awarded a writ of habeas corpus is entitled to immediate release from custody.

The writ of habeas corpus is not a substitute for an appeal. In contrast to an appeal from judgment, which is a form of direct review, a writ of habeas corpus is a form of indirect review that only focuses on legality of detention or imprisonment. While the appeal is a part of criminal proceeding, the writ of habeas corpus is a separate civil proceeding whose purpose is to provide for a swift judicial review of alleged unlawful restraint of liberty.