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 procedure depends on several important questions:
- Did the conviction follow a jury trial, bench trial, guilty plea, or no-contest plea?
- When did sentencing occur?
- Was appellate counsel requested or appointed?
- Have transcripts been ordered or filed?
- Were objections properly preserved?
- Were any postjudgment motions filed?
- Has an appeal already occurred?
- What legal errors actually appear in the record?
A Detroit criminal appeal is not a second trial.
An appellate lawyer examines what happened in the Third Judicial Circuit, identifies legally significant errors, determines the applicable standard of review, evaluates whether issues were properly preserved, and asks whether those errors justify appellate relief.
For someone convicted of murder, criminal sexual conduct, armed robbery, assault, a weapons offense, or another serious felony, that review can involve years—or even decades—of potential imprisonment.
The stakes justify a careful, independent analysis of the entire case.
Detroit Felony Cases Are Now Handled at the Wayne County Criminal Justice Center
The Third Judicial Circuit’s Criminal Division is located at the Wayne County Criminal Justice Center, 5301 Russell Street in Detroit.
All Third Circuit Criminal Division cases moved there effective September 3, 2024, completing the court’s move from the former Frank Murphy Hall of Justice. The complex includes 26 criminal courtrooms and also houses major components of the Wayne County criminal-justice system, including the Prosecutor’s Office, Sheriff’s Office and Clerk’s Office.
The Criminal Division handles felony cases bound over from Wayne County district courts.
That includes some of Michigan’s most serious prosecutions. The Wayne County Prosecutor’s Trial Division identifies its felony caseload as including homicide, sexual assault, armed robbery, home invasion, assault, arson, weapons offenses, drug cases and other serious crimes.
For someone seeking a Detroit criminal appeal after one of those cases, sentencing is often the beginning of the appellate question—not necessarily the end of the legal process.
Appealing a Detroit Felony Conviction After a Jury Trial
A defendant convicted following a jury or bench trial in the Third Judicial Circuit generally has a different appellate posture from a person convicted through a guilty plea.
A qualifying final felony judgment following trial generally proceeds through an appeal as of right to the Michigan Court of Appeals.
That distinction matters because the Court of Appeals must hear a properly perfected appeal of right within its jurisdiction.
Current Michigan appellate rules impose specific filing requirements and deadlines, including a generally applicable 42-day period in criminal appeals of right, subject to the triggering events and provisions contained in MCR 7.204.
But an appellate lawyer should not simply look at the sentencing date and start counting.
The procedural history may require examination of:
- the Judgment of Sentence;
- appointment of appellate counsel;
- transcript requests;
- transcript filings;
- motions for new trial;
- motions concerning sentencing;
- other postjudgment proceedings; and
- prior appellate filings.
For that reason, someone recently convicted after a Detroit felony trial should have the appellate timeline reviewed promptly.
See our complete guide to Michigan criminal appeal deadlines.
What Should Be Reviewed After a Detroit Felony Trial?
One of the biggest mistakes in appellate work is beginning with a predetermined theory.
A defendant may believe one thing went wrong.
A family member may focus on something else.
Trial counsel may have emphasized a third issue.
But the strongest appellate argument may be buried somewhere entirely different in the record.
A serious review of a felony conviction can include:
- pretrial motions;
- preliminary-examination proceedings;
- suppression hearings;
- jury selection;
- opening statements;
- witness testimony;
- evidentiary rulings;
- exhibits;
- expert testimony;
- defense objections;
- prosecutorial argument;
- jury instructions;
- verdict forms;
- sentencing guidelines;
- the PSI;
- sentencing arguments;
- and the judge’s explanation of the sentence.
The question should not be:
“What complaint does the defendant want raised?”
It should be:
“What are the strongest legally supportable appellate issues revealed by the record?”
That is a very different approach.
Insufficient Evidence After a Detroit Jury Conviction
Every criminal offense consists of specific legal elements.
The prosecution must prove each required element beyond a reasonable doubt.
That means appellate counsel should compare:
the elements required by Michigan law
against
the evidence actually presented at trial.
An insufficient-evidence appeal is not merely an argument that a witness was dishonest or that the jury should have believed the defense.
The stronger legal question is:
Even accepting the prosecution’s evidence in the light required by appellate law, did that evidence actually establish every required element of the conviction?
Sometimes the difference is decisive.
For more information, read When Insufficient Evidence Can Reverse a Michigan Criminal Conviction.
Evidentiary Errors Can Affect a Felony Trial
Serious criminal trials often involve difficult evidentiary rulings.
Potential appellate questions can involve:
- hearsay;
- prior-acts evidence;
- expert testimony;
- identification testimony;
- statements attributed to the defendant;
- photographs or recordings;
- impeachment evidence;
- forensic evidence;
- exclusion of defense evidence;
- evidence of other criminal conduct;
- character evidence;
- or other evidence that may have influenced the verdict.
The appellate analysis usually involves more than asking whether the trial judge’s decision was questionable.
Counsel must examine:
- What evidence was offered?
- What legal rule governed its admission?
- Was an objection made?
- What did the trial judge rule?
- What standard of appellate review applies?
- If the ruling was erroneous, did the error affect the defendant’s substantial rights or the outcome?
That final question can be especially important.
Not every evidentiary error requires reversal.
Prosecutorial Misconduct in a Detroit Criminal Appeal
A prosecutor is permitted to argue the case aggressively.
But there are limits.
Potential appellate issues can include allegations involving:
- arguments unsupported by the evidence;
- improper burden shifting;
- improper comments concerning a defendant’s silence;
- misstatements of law;
- improper appeals to sympathy;
- improper attacks on defense counsel;
- improper witness arguments;
- use of evidence for an impermissible purpose;
- or other conduct affecting the fairness of the proceedings.
Preservation becomes important here.
If defense counsel objected, one standard of appellate review may apply.
If counsel did not object, another standard may govern.
The appellate lawyer therefore needs to review both the prosecutor’s conduct and the defense response.
For a detailed explanation, see Prosecutorial Misconduct in Michigan Criminal Appeals.
Jury-Instruction Errors After Trial
Jury instructions tell the jurors what law they must apply.
That makes them critically important in a criminal case.
Potential appellate issues may arise when:
- an element is incorrectly stated;
- an instruction improperly lowers the prosecution’s burden;
- an available defense is omitted;
- an instruction is unsupported by the evidence;
- an incorrect theory is presented;
- a limiting instruction is missing;
- or the instructions, considered together, misstate the governing law.
A jury cannot be expected to apply the correct law if it was not correctly instructed.
An appellate lawyer should therefore examine not only the final written instructions but also:
- requested instructions;
- objections;
- discussions at the charging conference;
- rejected instructions;
- and the relationship between the instructions and the prosecution’s theory.
Constitutional Errors Can Become Central Appellate Issues
Some criminal appeals involve more than evidentiary or procedural rules.
They involve constitutional protections.
Potential constitutional questions can concern:
- the right to counsel;
- confrontation of witnesses;
- due process;
- the right to present a defense;
- unlawful searches;
- involuntary statements;
- identification procedures;
- jury-trial rights;
- language interpretation;
- a defendant’s right to be present;
- double jeopardy;
- and other protections guaranteed by the United States and Michigan Constitutions.
These claims often require careful analysis of both federal and Michigan authority.
They may also require examination of whether the constitutional issue was adequately developed below.
What About Errors by Defense Counsel?
Sometimes the potential appellate issue concerns what defense counsel did—or failed to do.
But appellate analysis requires more than concluding that another attorney would have tried the case differently.
Potential issues can involve:
- failure to investigate significant evidence;
- failure to interview an important witness;
- failure to obtain appropriate expert assistance;
- failure to file a potentially meritorious motion;
- failure to make a necessary objection;
- failure to preserve a significant issue;
- deficient plea advice;
- failure to challenge sentencing information;
- or other conduct that may satisfy the constitutional standard.
Some claims can be evaluated from the trial record.
Others depend upon evidence outside the record.
That distinction can become crucial.
For the full analysis, see Ineffective Assistance of Counsel in Michigan: Criminal Appeals and Ginther Hearings.
What If the Important Facts Are Outside the Trial Transcript?
The Michigan Court of Appeals normally reviews the record created below.
That creates a problem when an appellate issue depends upon facts that never became part of that record.
For example:
- counsel never interviewed an important witness;
- an expert was never consulted;
- evidence was never investigated;
- plea advice occurred privately;
- newly discovered evidence surfaced after trial;
- or another factual issue cannot be resolved from the transcripts.
In an appropriate case, appellate counsel may need to seek a remand to develop the record.
Under MCR 7.211(C)(1), a motion seeking factual development must identify the appellate issue and be supported by an affidavit or other offer of proof regarding the facts expected to be established.
This is not supposed to be a fishing expedition.
The appellate attorney should investigate enough beforehand to explain:
- what fact is missing;
- what evidence supports the allegation;
- who may testify;
- why the evidence matters;
- and how it affects the appellate issue.
That can make record development one of the most important parts of a serious appeal.
Appealing a Sentence After a Detroit Felony Conviction
A conviction can be legally valid while the sentence remains subject to appellate challenge.
Potential sentencing issues can include:
- incorrectly scored sentencing guidelines;
- inaccurate information in the PSI;
- use of an improper sentencing factor;
- an unlawful sentence;
- an unreasonable or disproportionate sentence;
- an error involving habitual-offender treatment;
- failure to follow an enforceable sentencing agreement;
- improper factual assumptions;
- or other legally significant sentencing errors.
This distinction matters.
A defendant does not necessarily have to ask the Court of Appeals to overturn the conviction.
The strongest request may instead be:
vacate the sentence and order resentencing.
For a detailed discussion, see Can I Appeal a Michigan Criminal Sentence?
The Sentencing Transcript and PSI Can Be Crucial
Families sometimes obtain the Judgment of Sentence and believe that is enough for an appellate review.
Often it is not.
The sentencing transcript may reveal:
- what defense counsel argued;
- what the prosecutor argued;
- which guidelines variables were disputed;
- what information the judge relied upon;
- whether objections were preserved;
- what reasons were given for the sentence;
- and whether potentially improper considerations influenced the result.
The PSI may contain:
- criminal-history information;
- offense descriptions;
- guidelines information;
- personal background;
- disputed factual material;
- victim information;
- and recommendations affecting sentencing.
Those documents can be critical when the proposed appeal concerns the sentence rather than the underlying conviction.
What If the Detroit Conviction Followed a Guilty Plea?
A guilty or no-contest plea changes the appellate process.
It does not necessarily eliminate appellate review.
Michigan law generally provides appellate review of a plea-based felony conviction through an application for leave to appeal rather than an ordinary appeal as of right.
Possible plea-related issues can include:
- whether the plea was understanding and voluntary;
- whether the plea agreement was correctly stated;
- whether the agreement was followed;
- whether the factual basis was adequate;
- whether important advice was constitutionally deficient;
- whether sentencing was legally proper;
- or whether another issue survived the plea.
Challenges to the validity of the plea itself may also need to be raised first through a motion to withdraw the plea in the trial court. Current MCR 6.310(D) contains important preservation requirements for plea-validity claims.
For more detail, read Can You Appeal a Guilty Plea in Michigan?
Applications for Leave After a Detroit Plea Conviction
A defendant seeking appellate review after a guilty or no-contest plea generally must persuade the Michigan Court of Appeals to grant leave.
That means the application is not merely procedural paperwork.
It should identify:
- the precise issue;
- how the issue arose;
- how it was preserved;
- the governing law;
- the relevant portions of the record;
- why the trial court’s ruling was legally incorrect;
- and why appellate intervention is warranted.
The current appellate rules also establish jurisdictional time limits for criminal applications for leave, with timing depending upon the procedural events identified in MCR 7.205(A)(2).
See our full Michigan Application for Leave to Appeal guide.
Why Preservation Matters
A major part of appellate analysis is determining whether a legal issue was properly raised in the trial court.
Preservation can occur through:
- an objection;
- a motion;
- a request for an instruction;
- a sentencing objection;
- a postjudgment motion;
- or another procedure required by Michigan law.
Why does this matter?
Because the standard of review may change substantially when an issue was not preserved.
That does not automatically mean an unpreserved issue is lost.
But appellate counsel needs to know:
Was the issue preserved?
Was it forfeited?
Was it waived?
What standard now applies?
Does the failure to preserve create another viable issue?
That analysis can determine how the appellate argument should be framed.
The Standard of Review Can Determine the Appeal
Appellate judges do not review every question the same way.
Depending upon the issue, the Court of Appeals may apply:
- de novo review;
- abuse-of-discretion review;
- clear-error review;
- plain-error review;
- harmless-error analysis;
- or another specialized standard.
A strong appellate brief must be written around the correct standard.
It is not enough to say:
“The judge was wrong.”
The argument should explain:
What legal standard governs?
What did the trial court do?
Why does that conduct fail under the applicable standard?
What prejudice or legal consequence resulted?
What remedy follows?
That is appellate analysis.
What Can the Michigan Court of Appeals Do?
A successful appeal can produce different forms of relief depending upon the error.
Potential remedies can include:
- reversal of one or more convictions;
- a new trial;
- resentencing;
- correction of a sentence;
- remand for an evidentiary hearing;
- remand for additional findings;
- plea-related relief;
- or another remedy authorized by law.
McClure is an example of partial reversal: three convictions were reversed while others remained.
Other appellate errors may require an entirely new trial.
Still others may affect only sentencing.
That is why the requested remedy should match the actual legal error.
What If the Michigan Court of Appeals Denies Relief?
An adverse Court of Appeals ruling does not always mean the state appellate process is finished.
Depending upon the posture of the case, a defendant may be able to seek discretionary review in the Michigan Supreme Court.
That stage is different.
The Supreme Court does not have to hear every case.
A strong Supreme Court application therefore must often do more than repeat the Court of Appeals argument. It should explain why the case warrants review under the standards governing Michigan’s highest court.
If the Court of Appeals has already rejected the case, see our guide to a Michigan Supreme Court criminal appeal.
What If the Direct Appeal Is Already Over?
Older Detroit convictions present a different set of questions.
A defendant who has already completed direct appellate review may need to consider Michigan’s post-conviction procedure under MCR 6.500.
Potential post-conviction issues can involve:
- newly discovered evidence;
- constitutional violations;
- issues involving prior representation;
- an invalid plea;
- certain sentencing problems;
- issues that were not previously raised for legally sufficient reasons;
- or other grounds recognized by Michigan law.
But an MCR 6.500 motion is not simply another appeal.
Michigan’s rules place significant restrictions on post-conviction litigation, including issues that could have been raised previously and successive motions.
The entire procedural history should therefore be reviewed before filing.
See Michigan Motion for Relief from Judgment under MCR 6.500.
What About the Wayne County Conviction Integrity Unit?
People with older Detroit convictions sometimes hear about the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Conviction Integrity Unit, or CIU.
It is important to understand that a CIU investigation is not the same thing as an appeal.
Wayne County explains that its CIU focuses primarily on claims of actual innocence supported by new evidence. The CIU is not a court, is not governed by Michigan’s appellate rules, and is not part of the ordinary appellate or post-conviction process. Only a court can actually set aside a conviction.
The CIU also generally does not function as a vehicle for ordinary claims that:
- a sentence was too harsh;
- the prosecution made a legal error;
- the trial judge made a reversible evidentiary ruling;
- or another traditional appellate issue occurred.
That distinction is important.
A Detroit criminal appeal, an MCR 6.500 motion, and a CIU innocence claim are different procedures serving different purposes.
In some unusual cases, more than one avenue may warrant consideration.
What If the Conviction Was at Frank Murphy Rather Than the New CJC?
The courthouse changed.
The appellate principles did not disappear.
The Third Judicial Circuit Criminal Division moved from the Frank Murphy Hall of Justice to the new Criminal Justice Center in September 2024.
Many defendants now seeking:
- post-conviction relief;
- Supreme Court review;
- MCR 6.500 relief;
- newly discovered evidence review;
- or analysis of an older conviction
were originally tried or sentenced at Frank Murphy.
The relevant question is not which building appears on the old transcript.
It is:
What happened in the Wayne Circuit criminal case, what appellate review has already occurred, and what legal procedures remain available now?
Why Detroit Appellate Experience Matters
A location page should not simply say:
“We handle Detroit appeals.”
The more important question for a potential client is:
What experience does the attorney actually bring to the review of a serious felony conviction?
James Czarnecki’s professional background includes both trial-level criminal litigation and appellate work.
He graduated from Wayne State University Law School in 2004, where he served as Editor-in-Chief of the Moot Court program.
His early criminal-law training included experience with:
- the State Appellate Defender Office;
- the Federal Defender Office; and
- the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office.
He began his legal career working on criminal appeals and later spent nearly ten years with a Detroit-area firm, eventually serving as head of its criminal department.
His practice has included more than 1,000 criminal matters and experience ranging from serious felony trials to Michigan Court of Appeals, Michigan Supreme Court, federal and post-conviction litigation.
That combination can matter in appellate review.
A lawyer examining a trial transcript should understand what actually happens during:
- jury selection;
- witness examination;
- evidentiary objections;
- suppression litigation;
- plea negotiations;
- trial strategy;
- sentencing;
- and preservation of legal issues.
Appellate work is different from trial work.
But understanding both can help counsel identify when something in the trial record deserves closer legal scrutiny.
Two Wayne Circuit Cases Show the Difference Careful Appellate Review Can Make
Czarnecki’s appellate work includes two particularly relevant Wayne Circuit cases.
People v. McClure: Finding a Reversible Error in a Serious Wayne County Felony Case
People v. McClure, Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 317995, is a strong example of the kind of detailed record and statutory analysis that serious appellate work requires. Learn more how three felonious assault charges were reversed in the McClure case study.
McClure had been convicted by a Wayne County jury of numerous serious offenses, including kidnapping, first-degree criminal sexual conduct, armed robbery, and three counts of felonious assault. The existence of multiple serious convictions made it especially important to analyze each conviction independently rather than treating the case as one undifferentiated verdict.
James Czarnecki represented McClure on appeal.
In reviewing the case, Czarnecki identified a distinct legal weakness in the three felonious-assault convictions. Michigan’s felonious-assault statute required proof of an assault committed with a dangerous weapon. The evidence, however, established that the object involved was not a real firearm. The appellate question therefore was not simply whether the witnesses were believable or whether the jury had reached the wrong factual conclusion. It was whether the prosecution had actually proven the statutory element necessary to sustain those three convictions.
The Michigan Court of Appeals agreed with the defense argument. It held that the statute required a dangerous weapon—not merely an object that appeared to be one—and reversed all three felonious-assault convictions.
The significance of McClure as an appellate credential goes beyond the fact that three convictions were overturned.
It demonstrates an important appellate skill: the ability to separate a large and complicated criminal record into its individual legal components and identify an issue capable of producing actual relief.
An appellate lawyer reviewing a serious felony case cannot assume that because the prosecution proved some charges, every conviction necessarily stands. Each conviction has elements. Each element must be supported by legally sufficient evidence. Each ruling must be evaluated under the correct standard of review.
In McClure, that element-by-element analysis resulted in three felony convictions being eliminated.
For a defendant or family considering an appeal from a serious Detroit felony case, that result demonstrates something more meaningful than simply saying an attorney “handles appeals.” It shows experience finding a precise legal defect in an actual Wayne Circuit jury conviction and successfully presenting it to the Michigan Court of Appeals.
People v. Gonzalez-Raymundo: Appellate Advocacy That Helped Shape Michigan Law
People v. Gonzalez-Raymundo, 308 Mich App 175; 862 NW2d 657 (2014), is an even more significant example of James Czarnecki’s appellate experience. Learn more about how appellate law changed and a right was established int the Gonzalez-Raymundo case study.
Gonzalez-Raymundo had been convicted by a Wayne County jury of four counts of third-degree criminal sexual conduct and sentenced to concurrent prison terms of 5 to 15 years.
His primary language was Spanish.
Although an interpreter had been involved in earlier proceedings, the jury trial proceeded without simultaneous interpretation. Trial counsel had expressed concern that using an interpreter could negatively influence the jury and proposed explaining matters to Gonzalez-Raymundo during breaks instead.
The trial court did not personally obtain an informed waiver from Gonzalez-Raymundo of his right to an interpreter.
After the convictions, Czarnecki represented Gonzalez-Raymundo on appeal and identified the interpreter issue as a potentially serious constitutional problem.
But identifying the issue was only the beginning.
Developing the Record Instead of Accepting It as It Existed
One of the most important skills in appellate practice is recognizing when the existing trial record is insufficient to fully litigate an issue.
Czarnecki sought and obtained a remand from the Michigan Court of Appeals for a hearing under People v. Ginther. He then personally conducted the Ginther hearing in the trial court.
That additional factual development allowed the trial court to examine what had actually occurred concerning the interpreter, the defendant’s ability to understand the proceedings, and the circumstances surrounding the purported waiver.
Following the hearing, the trial court granted Gonzalez-Raymundo a new trial, concluding that proceeding without the necessary interpreter violated his constitutional rights.
The prosecution appealed that ruling.
The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the grant of a new trial in a published opinion.
Why Gonzalez-Raymundo Is Important Beyond One Defendant’s Case
The importance of Gonzalez-Raymundo extends beyond the fact that one defendant obtained a new trial.
Because the Court of Appeals published the decision, Gonzalez-Raymundo became Michigan appellate precedent.
The Court explained that the right to necessary interpretation in a criminal prosecution is not merely a matter of convenience. The absence of simultaneous translation can implicate fundamental constitutional protections, including due process, the defendant’s presence at trial, the ability to confront witnesses, and the ability to participate meaningfully in the defense.
The Court further recognized that when a defendant does not adequately understand the proceedings, that defendant can be effectively absent from his own trial. It also rejected the notion that defense counsel could simply make the decision for the defendant without a proper personal waiver.
The significance of that holding can be seen in what happened afterward.
Michigan appellate courts have continued to cite Gonzalez-Raymundo when addressing a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to interpretation and meaningful participation in trial proceedings. For example, later Court of Appeals decisions have cited it for the principles that the lack of simultaneous translation implicates due process and that the right to an interpreter is constitutional and subject to meaningful waiver requirements.
That makes Gonzalez-Raymundo different from an ordinary unpublished appellate victory.
It became part of Michigan criminal appellate law.
What Gonzalez-Raymundo Demonstrates About Appellate Ability
The case illustrates several skills that matter in serious appellate representation.
First, issue spotting. The important appellate issue was not simply a disagreement with the jury’s verdict. It concerned a constitutional problem in the manner in which the trial itself had been conducted.
Second, recognizing an inadequate record. Rather than attempting to litigate the issue solely from an incomplete trial record, Czarnecki sought remand so the necessary facts could be developed.
Third, evidentiary-hearing experience. Czarnecki personally conducted the Ginther hearing that developed the factual record underlying the trial court’s decision to grant a new trial.
Fourth, connecting facts to constitutional law. The case required more than demonstrating that interpretation would have been helpful. The issue had to be framed in terms of the defendant’s constitutional ability to understand the proceedings, confront witnesses, remain meaningfully present, and participate in his own defense.
Finally, obtaining meaningful relief. The appellate work led to a new trial, and that relief survived the prosecution’s appeal in a published Michigan Court of Appeals decision.
For a person evaluating appellate counsel after a serious Detroit felony conviction, Gonzalez-Raymundo therefore represents more than a favorable case result. It shows experience with the complete appellate process: identifying a constitutional issue, obtaining a remand, developing the record through an evidentiary hearing, securing a new trial, and contributing to a published decision that continues to influence Michigan law.
Two Cases, Two Different Appellate Skills
Taken together, McClure and Gonzalez-Raymundo demonstrate why effective appellate representation cannot depend on a single type of argument.
In McClure, careful analysis of the statutory elements and trial evidence resulted in three felony convictions being reversed.
In Gonzalez-Raymundo, identifying a constitutional problem, developing facts outside the existing record, and litigating the issue through remand resulted in a new trial and a published appellate decision that became Michigan precedent.
One case required precise sufficiency-of-the-evidence analysis.
The other required constitutional analysis, investigation, record development, an evidentiary hearing, and appellate litigation concerning a fundamental trial right.
That range is particularly relevant when reviewing a serious conviction from Detroit’s Criminal Justice Center. The strongest appellate issue is not predetermined. It must be discovered through a careful review of the particular record, the applicable law, and the proceedings that occurred below.
That is the approach James Czarnecki brings to Michigan criminal appellate representation.
What Documents Should a Family Gather?
If a family member has recently been convicted at the Criminal Justice Center, begin with whatever records are available.
Useful materials can include:
Basic case information
- Defendant’s full name
- Case number
- Judge
- Charges
- Convictions
- Sentencing date
- Sentence imposed
- Whether the conviction followed trial or plea
Court records
- Judgment of Sentence
- Register of Actions
- Trial transcripts
- Plea transcript
- Sentencing transcript
- Preliminary-examination transcript
- Motion-hearing transcripts
- Jury instructions
- Relevant motions and orders
- Sentencing guidelines
- PSI
Previous appellate records
- Claim of Appeal
- Application for Leave to Appeal
- Appellate briefs
- Court of Appeals orders or opinions
- Michigan Supreme Court applications or orders
- Prior motions for new trial
- Previous MCR 6.500 filings
Do not assume you need every document before contacting appellate counsel.
Part of the initial review is determining what records already exist and what still needs to be obtained.
Criminal Transcripts from the Detroit Criminal Justice Center
The Third Judicial Circuit maintains procedures for obtaining criminal transcripts from proceedings at the CJC.
Its current transcript-request form specifically provides for requests involving an appeal, an application for leave, and a Michigan Court of Appeals case. The form currently advises that appeal-purpose transcript requests may require substantial processing time.
That is another reason to begin identifying and obtaining the record early.
Waiting until a filing deadline is approaching can create unnecessary difficulty.
What Should an Appellate Lawyer Ask First?
When reviewing a serious Detroit conviction, the first questions should be practical:
When was the defendant sentenced?
Was the conviction by trial or plea?
Was appellate counsel appointed?
Have transcripts been filed?
Was a claim of appeal or application for leave already filed?
Were postjudgment motions filed?
Has the Court of Appeals already acted?
Has the Michigan Supreme Court already been asked to review the case?
Has an MCR 6.500 motion already been filed?
Once those procedural questions are answered, counsel can begin asking the substantive questions:
Was every element proven?
Was important evidence improperly admitted or excluded?
Were constitutional rights violated?
Did the prosecutor cross a legal line?
Were the jury instructions correct?
Was an important issue preserved?
Did the sentence comply with Michigan law?
Does the record need additional factual development?
Those questions provide a much better foundation for appellate strategy than simply asking whether the defendant believes the trial was unfair.
Frequently Asked Questions About Detroit Criminal Appeals
Can I appeal a felony conviction after a jury trial in Detroit?
Generally, a qualifying final felony conviction following a jury or bench trial in circuit court can proceed through an appeal as of right to the Michigan Court of Appeals, subject to the applicable Michigan Court Rules and deadlines.
We detail everything you need to know about the Michigan Appeal Process.
Where are Detroit felony trials held now?
The Third Judicial Circuit Criminal Division is housed at the Wayne County Criminal Justice Center at 5301 Russell Street in Detroit.
Where does a felony appeal from the CJC go?
A qualifying circuit-court felony appeal generally proceeds to the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Can I appeal if I pleaded guilty?
Potentially, yes. A plea-based felony conviction generally proceeds through an application for leave to appeal rather than an ordinary appeal as of right.
Can I appeal only my sentence?
Potentially, yes. A defendant can have a valid conviction but still possess a legitimate sentencing issue.
What if the prosecution did not prove an element of the crime?
A legally insufficient conviction can potentially be reversed. The appellate court examines whether the evidence was sufficient under the governing legal standard.
What if evidence was wrongly admitted?
Improper evidentiary rulings can support appellate relief in an appropriate case, but preservation, standard of review and prejudice all matter.
What if my trial lawyer did not object?
That may affect the standard of appellate review. It does not necessarily end the analysis.
What if important evidence was never investigated?
If the issue depends upon facts outside the existing trial record, additional factual development may sometimes be necessary.
What if I do not have the transcripts?
Tell appellate counsel what records are available. The attorney can determine which transcripts and documents are necessary for review.
What if my first appeal was denied?
Further Michigan Supreme Court review or post-conviction procedures may potentially remain available depending upon the procedural history.
What if my conviction happened years ago at Frank Murphy?
Older Wayne Circuit convictions may still present post-conviction questions. The fact that the Criminal Division later moved to the new CJC does not change the procedural history of the conviction.
Is the Wayne County Conviction Integrity Unit the same as an appeal?
No. The CIU focuses primarily on claims of actual innocence involving new evidence. It is not a court and is not part of Michigan’s regular appellate process.
A Serious Detroit Felony Conviction Deserves an Independent Appellate Review
The verdict tells you what the jury decided.
The Judgment of Sentence tells you what punishment was imposed.
Neither document, standing alone, tells you whether every legal issue was handled correctly.
A meaningful appellate review asks:
Did the prosecution prove every element?
Were evidentiary rulings legally correct?
Were constitutional rights protected?
Were objections preserved?
Were jury instructions accurate?
Was the sentence legally supportable?
Does the existing record contain everything necessary?
What standard of review applies?
What relief can legally be requested?
The answers are found in the record, Michigan statutes, Michigan Court Rules, constitutional law and appellate precedent.
That is why appellate review requires a fresh perspective.
Contact Czarnecki & Taylor PLLC About a Detroit Criminal Appeal
If you or a family member was convicted of a serious felony at the Wayne County Criminal Justice Center—or previously in the Third Judicial Circuit when criminal cases were handled at Frank Murphy—do not assume that the verdict or sentence answers every legal question. Contact our office if you want to file a Detroit criminal appeal.
Czarnecki & Taylor PLLC represents defendants in Michigan criminal appeals, applications for leave to appeal, sentencing challenges, Michigan Supreme Court proceedings and post-conviction matters.
James Czarnecki’s appellate experience includes Wayne Circuit cases in which:
- three felony convictions were reversed in People v McClure; and
- a new-trial order was affirmed in the published decision People v Gonzalez-Raymundo.
His background also combines extensive trial-level criminal litigation with appellate record analysis, brief writing, constitutional litigation and post-conviction work.
If possible, have the defendant’s:
- name;
- case number;
- sentencing date;
- charges and convictions;
- plea-or-trial status;
- Judgment of Sentence;
- transcripts;
- PSI;
- and prior appellate information
available when contacting the office.
Do not worry if you do not have everything.
The first step is determining where the case stands, what records exist, what appellate deadlines may apply, and whether the record presents a legally viable basis for relief.
Call Czarnecki & Taylor PLLC at (586) 718-2345 to discuss a Detroit criminal appeal, sentencing challenge or post-conviction matter.
Use the button below if you want to send a confidential email.
Past results do not guarantee future results. Every appeal depends upon its own facts, record, preservation of issues, procedural history, applicable law and deadlines. This article provides general legal information and does not constitute legal advice.
