IMPROVING THE HANDLING OF CRIMINAL CASES IN THE FEDERAL APPELLATE SYSTEM

• NCJ Number: 13769
• Journal: Cornell Law Review Volume: 59 Issue: 4 Dated: (APRIL 1974) Pages: 597-615
• Author(s): C F HAYNSWORTH
• Date Published: 1974
• Length: 19 pages
• Corporate Author: Cornell University
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: PAPER PRESENTED AT THE 56TH FRANK IRVINE LECTURE SERIES, CORNELL LAW SCHOOL, OCTOBER 19, 1973.

Annotation

A PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH A NATIONAL COURT OF APPEALS WHICH WOULD HAVE THE EXCLUSIVE FEDERAL JURISDICTION TO REVIEW CONVICTIONS IN THE FEDERAL AND STATE JUDICIAL SYSTEMS.

Abstract

THE AUTHOR NOTES THAT THE WRITE OF HABEAS CORPUS IS NOW SERVING AS A VEHICLE FOR ALL COLLATERAL REVIEW OF FEDERAL QUESTIONS ARISING IN CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS. HE VIEWS THIS AS BOTH AN UNWARRANTED EXTENSION OF THE WRIT AND AS THE CAUSE OF A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE OF JUDICIAL WORK. HE PROPOSES INSTEAD A NATIONAL COURT OF APPEALS HAVING JURISDICTION TO REVIEW, ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI, ALL FEDERAL QUESTIONS ARISING IN CONVICTIONS IN THE STATE AND FEDERAL SYSTEMS. BECAUSE THE SYSTEM OF CORRECTIONS IS SO CLOSELY RELATED TO THE JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS, THE NEW COURT SHOULD HAVE SIMILAR JURISDICTION TO REVIEW ALL CASES ADJUDICATING OTHER RIGHTS OF BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE PRISONERS. INCLUDED WOULD BE SUCH CLAIMS AS THE DEPRIVATION OF ACCESS TO THE COURTS AND OF RIGHTS TO REASONABLE CORRESPONDENCE, THE ARBITRARY IMPOSITION OF PUNITIVE MEASURES OR THE DEPRIVATION OF ACCRUED RIGHTS AND CREDITS, AND THE DENIAL OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND REASONABLE MEDICAL SERVICES. THE COURT SHOULD BE GIVEN JURISDICTION TO HEAR AND DETERMINE CASES UNRELATED TO CRIMES AND THE RIGHTS OF IMPRISONED PERSONS WHICH MAY BE REFERRED TO IT BY THE SUPREME COURT. THE AUTHOR INCLUDES IN THE NEW COURT'S JURISDICTION FEDERAL CASES INVOLVING FEDERAL CONVICTIONS AND FEDERAL PRISONER CLAIMS BECAUSE THE COURT SHOULD SERVE A UNIFYING FUNCTION. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT THE SAME FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS BE APPLIED WITH REASONABLE CONSISTENCY IN EVERY STATE IN THE UNION AND IN EVERY FEDERAL DISTRICT AND CIRCUIT. THIS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED ONLY IF THE NEW COURT REVIEWS DECISIONS OF THE COURTS OF APPEALS JUST AS IT REVIEWS DECISIONS OF THE HIGHEST COURTS OF THE STATES. COMMENTS ARE ALSO DIRECTED TO OTHER PROPOSALS WHICH WOULD MODIFY FEDERAL REVIEW OF CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)