A witness changed a story. The judge excluded evidence. A defense attorney never contacted someone who could have helped. The sentence seemed far more severe than the circumstances justified. Each concern deserves attention. But the question on appeal is not simply whether something went wrong. It is whether the mistake supports a legal claim, can…
James Czarnecki worked on the Ricardo Pena criminal appeal while working with appellate attorney Gerald Lorence. After reviewing transcripts, identifying issues and drafting appellate pleadings involving perjury and prosecutorial misconduct, the prosecution ultimately confessed error in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
In the post-conviction investigation of People v. Mario Smith, attorney James Czarnecki reconstructed an old murder case, located medical evidence, obtained an independent forensic review from a medical examiner, and supplied expert proof the original appellate record lacked
James Czarnecki raised and preserved the Miller retroactivity issue in Mario Smith’s Michigan post-conviction litigation while existing Michigan precedent rejected the argument. After Montgomery held Miller retroactive, the Michigan Supreme Court vacated Smith’s life-without-parole sentence and ordered resentencing.
James Czarnecki successfully challenged three Michigan convictions through an MCR 6.500 motion after the plea and sentencing transcripts revealed a significant error concerning HYTA eligibility. After the convictions were vacated, he negotiated with the prosecutor and the charges were not pursued again.
Obtaining a new trial after a first-degree murder conviction is among the most significant forms of relief that can be achieved in criminal appellate litigation. People v. Lionel Beauchamp is a concrete example. Beauchamp had been convicted by a Wayne County jury of first-degree murder and second-degree murder. His first-degree murder conviction resulted in a…
A criminal conviction does not necessarily end the search for the truth. Sometimes important evidence is discovered only after the trial has ended. A witness may come forward for the first time. A prosecution witness may admit that prior testimony was false. New scientific research may undermine expert testimony used to obtain the conviction. Previously…
The right to appeal a criminal conviction has little practical meaning if a person lacks the legal assistance necessary to pursue that appeal. That principle was at the center of significant constitutional litigation in Michigan following the United States Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Halbert v. Michigan, 545 U.S. 605 (2005). The litigation concerned whether…
If you or a family member was convicted of a felony in Detroit’s Wayne County Criminal Justice Center, the conviction or sentence may be reviewable through Michigan’s appellate process. A conviction following a jury trial does not necessarily mean the legal issues in the case are over. Neither does a guilty plea. The correct appellate…
Ineffective assistance of counsel can provide grounds for relief from a Michigan criminal conviction or sentence. But proving that an attorney made a mistake is not enough. A defendant generally must establish two things: That constitutional framework comes from Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 (1984), and is applied by Michigan courts through decisions including…
