Criminal Appeals Design and Development Plan

Criminal Appeals - Design and Development Plan (2).pdf

Survey of State Court Criminal Appeals

Criminal Appeals Design and Development Plan

OMB: 1121-0331

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

National Center for State Courts
300 Newport Avenue
Williamsburg, VA 23185
800-616-6109
www.ncsc.org

Implementation Plan
Survey of State Court Criminal Appeals:
Design and Development

Brenda K. Uekert, PhD
Nicole Waters, PhD
Shauna Strickland, MPA
Deborah Saunders, JD
November 19, 2009
This project was supported by Grant No.2008-BJ-CX-K047 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs,
U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official
position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Acknowledgements
This project benefited from the guidance of Thomas Cohen, Don Farole, and Duren
Banks of the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The National Center for State Courts contracted with
Westat, a leading statistical survey research organization. Westat senior statistician James Green
contributed the sample design portion of this product. Invaluable insight and advice was
provided by an advisory board. We thank the following individuals for contributing their time
and expertise to this project:
•

Thomas E. Baker, Professor of Law, Florida International University College of Law

•

Peter Haas, Director of Technology, Supreme Court of Louisiana, (representing the
Conference of Appellate Technology Officers)

•

Thomas D. Hall, Clerk of Court, Supreme Court of Florida (representing the National
Conference of Appellate Court Clerks)

•

John Olivier, Clerk of Court, Supreme Court of Louisiana (representing the National
Conference of Appellate Court Clerks)

Implementation Plan

Contents

Background……………………………………………………………….…………………..…1
Recommendations from the Design and Development Phase…………………………………...2
Project Implementation Steps and Proposed Timeframe……………………………………….14
Appendices……………………………….…………………………………………………….26

Implementation Plan

Background
In 2008, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) was awarded a grant from the
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to develop an implementation plan for a national study of
criminal appeals. The goal of the national survey is to generate knowledge about the criminal
appellate process and statistics, including the collection of data on the types and dispositions of
criminal cases appealed, the impact of appellate litigation on trial court outcomes, and appellate
case processing time. Six objectives guided the design and development phase, which is
considered a prelude to conducting a national survey:
1. To develop a data collection instrument to obtain information on criminal cases appealed
from a state trial court to an intermediate appellate court and/or court of last resort;
2. To develop various sampling methodologies for producing reliable estimates of state
criminal appellate litigation in both intermediate appellate courts and courts of last resort;
3. To develop statistical models for assessing the reliability of the proposed sampling
frameworks;
4. To conduct field tests of the data collection instrument in a range of intermediate
appellate courts and courts of last resort;
5. To develop methods to encourage participation from key professional appellate court
agencies; and
6. To provide an implementation plan for the national data collection.
This implementation plan addresses each objective and offers recommendations, a timeline with
task plan, and supplemental information necessary to administer the national survey.

Implementation Plan

Recommendations from the Design and Development Phase
The design and development phase took place between September 1, 2008 and December
31, 2009. An advisory board of experts, representing academia, the National Conference of
Appellate Court Clerks, and the Conference of Appellate Technology Officers guided the project
throughout the grant period.1 Project activities revolved around the design and pilot test of the
data collection instruments and the development of a nationally representative sample design.
The following recommendations should be considered for the implementation of the national
survey:
1. Base the sample on appellate courts rather than trial courts,
2. Restrict the data collection to direct appeals,
3. Select a reasonably precise and cost-effective probability sample of appeals, and
4. Provide technical assistance funds to produce and market deliverables.

1. Base the Sample on Appellate Courts
The national survey of criminal appeals can be based on cases from appellate courts, trial
courts, or a combination of both. The determination of the most suitable approach is influenced
by the types of research questions to be answered and the feasibility of the various approaches.
A key issue that was addressed during the early stages of the design phase was the feasibility of
compiling data that could be used to calculate the rate of criminal appeals. To establish a rate of
criminal appeals, the project would have to begin with cases heard in the trial court and then
follow the cases to determine if they were appealed to a higher court. Thus, the advantages and

A representative from the Council of Chief Judges of the State Courts of Appeal (CCJSCA) served on the board
but was unable to fully participate in the project.

Implementation Plan

disadvantages of pulling a sample from either the trial courts (i.e., a “bottom up” approach) or
the appellate courts (i.e., a “top down” approach) were weighed.
Ultimately, the NCSC/Westat research team, BJS, and the advisory group concluded that
the “top down” approach, which concentrates on appellate court data, offers the most costeffective approach at this time. The basic reasons for this decision are:
•

A “master list” of trial courts with jurisdiction over criminal cases in the United
States does not exist. This is in contrast to the finite number of appellate courts, each
clearly defined by the state (see Appendix A and B).

•

Misdemeanors and felonies are often handled by different levels of trial courts
(limited versus general jurisdiction courts). Consequently, reliance on trial court data
to establish a sampling frame requires multiple steps to identify appropriate courts.

•

Most lower-level courts are not capable of providing automated data on criminal
cases, especially misdemeanors. Generally, appellate courts are more likely to have
automated systems in place and better documentation of cases than trial courts.

•

It would be time-consuming and challenging to learn which cases from the trial court
were formally filed with the appellate court.

While the “top down” approach precludes the ability to calculate rates of appeal, the
determination of the sampling frame generates the types of research questions that can be
addressed in the national survey. In particular, the national survey can address questions that
revolve around issues of case types, timeliness, and outcomes, as demonstrated in the following
set of research questions.

Case Types
•

What proportion of direct appeals are based on the conviction? Sentence? Both?

•

How do appeals vary by type of conviction (capital felony crimes, non-capital felonies,
misdemeanors)?

•

What are the criminal offenses in those cases being appealed (i.e., murder, assault,
burglary, drug offenses)?

•

What types of legal issues are raised on appeal?

•

How do the types of cases reviewed by intermediate appellate courts (IACs) differ from
those reviewed by the courts of last resort (COLRs)?
Implementation Plan

•

How does the nature of criminal appeals vary from state to state?

•

What percentage of appeals involved representation by a public defender? Selfrepresented defendants?

•

If the case is then appealed to the COLR from the IAC, what types of appeals are
accepted by the COLR?

Timeliness
•

What are the processing times for appeals resolved in IACs and COLRs (e.g., record filed
to briefing completed to decision)?

•

Which courts are most and least expeditious?

•

How do state laws (e.g., appeal by right versus appeal by permission jurisdiction) impact
processing times?

Outcome
•

What percentage of appeals “wash out” (withdrawn voluntarily, abandoned, or dismissed
by the court)?

•

Of those cases appealed, how many are decided in favor of the criminal defendant?

•

How often is the trial court decision affirmed, reversed, modified or remanded for a new
trial?

•

How often does the COLR affirm, reverse or modify the findings of the IAC?

2. Restrict Cases to Direct Appeals
National surveys face an imposing challenge: states often use different definitions and
classifications.2 As a result, there is always a danger of mixing a variety of case types into a
single “basket” as to make comparisons meaningless. In this study, four case types were used:
direct appeals, post-conviction appeals, cross-appeals, and interlocutory appeals.

See Appendix C for a diagram of the general appellate court process.

Implementation Plan

Direct appeals occur when the defendant appeals the final judgment of the trial
court. The appeal can be either by right or by permission and can be taken from
the final judgment of the defendant’s conviction, sentence, or both. The state
may also file a direct appeal in some instances, e.g. the state may be able to file
an appeal of the defendant’s sentence.
Post-conviction appeals occur when the defendant challenges the constitutionality
of his or her conviction or sentence or the conditions of his or her confinement.
Post-conviction appeals do not address the facts of the case, e.g. a defendant may
file a writ of habeas corpus.
Cross-appeals occur when the defendant and state both appeal a trial court
judgment or sentence.
Interlocutory appeals occur when the defendant or state appeal a non-final
judgment of the trial court.

While direct appeals tend to be readily identified, other appeal types may include an array of
cases and may be handled quite differently across states. To help determine the procedure for
and distribution of appeal types, the NCSC research team, with assistance from members of the
advisory board, collected information from listserv inquiries and through the distribution of a
data collection form. In April 2009, two questions were sent to the NCACC and CATO
listservs:
Question #1: How common are interlocutory appeals filed by defendants in criminal
cases? Is this type of appeal identified in your case management system? If defendants
cannot appeal, can they seek some sort of other interlocutory review, and if they can,
please answer the questions with that information.
Question #2: According to some, there is an increase in the number of appeals filed in
regard to the length of the criminal sentence. For instance, a defendant appeals the
amount of time deducted from his sentence for good behavior. Are these types of cases
included in your criminal appellate court caseload? How are they addressed?

Listserv responses were received from appellate courts in several states and the District of
Columbia. Generally, interlocutory cases are considered uncommon in most states. In regard to
Implementation Plan

the handling of sentencing issues, there was considerable variance among the courts. In an
attempt to further clarify classification schemes and counts across states, a data collection form
was created and sent to nine appellate courts (see Appendix L for the form). The results from six
responding courts are shown below.3
No. of
Criminal
Appeals

Court
New York Court of
Appeals
Virginia Court of
Appeals
Minnesota Court of
Appeals
Oregon Supreme
Court
Florida 2nd District
Court of Appeal
Texas Court of
Criminal Appeals

Percent
Direct
Appeals

Percent Postconviction
appeals

Percent
interlocutory
appeals

Percent
“other”
appeals

2,690

100%

2,480

98%

765

81%

19%

796

66%

34%

3,455

49%

46%

6,651

21%

68%

11%

The data from this small sample of courts show that (1) interlocutory appeals are not
common, and (2) there is considerable variance in the inclusion of post-conviction appeals in the
criminal caseload. For example, Florida has a growing body of law in which an individual isn’t
challenging the original sentence, but rather the amount of time actually served. This is a type of
“quasi-criminal” case that in the past was considered civil, but is currently being processed as a
criminal appeal. Other states, such as New York, treat writs of habeas corpus and other postconviction appeals as civil appeals. Consequently, the inclusion of post-conviction appeals in
the study may jeopardize the comparability of cases across states.
As part of this project, NCSC staff tested the validity of the coding forms on a variety of
criminal appeals. This pilot test showed that both post-conviction and interlocutory cases were

Those courts that did not complete and return the data summary sheet include the Illinois Appellate Court (1 st
District), Utah Court of Appeals, and the California Supreme Court.

Implementation Plan

extremely difficult to code. The coding forms developed for the project proved insufficient to
capture the complexity of these cases, and coders found that it took approximately twice as long
to code them as compared to direct appeals. Due to this difficulty it would be necessary to create
new coding forms specific to these case types if they are included in the national survey. For
these reasons, NCSC recommends that the national study focus on direct appeals.4

3. Select a Reasonably Precise and Cost-Effective Probability Sample of
Appeals
The criminal appeals sample design should meet the following analytic objectives. First,
the sample design should provide nationally representative estimates of the number of criminal
appeals in process at a given point in time. Second, the design should include the analytic
subgroups of courts of last resort (COLR) and intermediate appellate courts (IACs).
A “top down” design would involve a sample of appellate courts and a sample of cases
within those courts. Three variations of a “top down” design were considered:
1. A single-stage design that includes all COLRs and IACs with certainty and selects
cases within each court.
2. A two-stage design that draws a sample of both COLRs and IACS and selects cases
within each court (Designs 1A and 1B in Table 1).
3. A two-stage design that includes all COLRs with certainty and a sample of IACs. A
sample of cases would be selected within
Average cost of adding a court to the sample:
each court (Design 2 in Table 1).
The appellate court population consists of 52
courts of last resort5 and 91 intermediate appellate

COLR: $1,480
IAC: $1,760

Average cost of adding a case to the sample:
COLR: $110
IAC: $120
Average costs take into account variations in access
to electronic data and the complexity of cases found
in COLRs and IACs.

4
5

The coding forms and instructions for direct criminal appeals can be found in Appendices D through K.
Two COLRs – Oklahoma Supreme Court and Texas Supreme Court – do not have criminal jurisdiction..

Implementation Plan

courts6. Because the number of courts in total (143) is somewhat large, and the incremental
average cost of bringing a court into the sample is large compared to the incremental average
cost of sampling cases within courts, we recommend against further consideration of the first
design variation given above.
Table 1 presents several relevant decision-making measures for the remaining design
variations. For each design evaluated, Table 1 includes:
• a name for each design
• the type of court stratification (COLR, IAC)
• The court (N1h) and case (N2h) population sizes
• The court (n1h) and case (n2h) sample sizes proposed for each design
• The incremental costs of bringing a court (C1h) and case (C2h) into the sample
• The total cost (C) for each design (excluding project management/administration)
• The design effect, or differential weighting effect, for each design
• The effective sample size offered for each design
The sample sizes offered by the various designs presented in Table 1 range from 1,000 to 2,500
in increments of 500. This range was chosen based on the minimum levels of precision and
maximum levels of cost, effort, and manageable size envisioned for the study. NCSC
recommends that the national survey be carried out over a three-year period—two years to
collect and deliver the data to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and a third year of technical
assistance to address data issues, draft reports, and market product deliverables. 7 Based on
previous experiences with national studies of appeals, project manageability is enhanced if the
final sample of cases is between 1,000 and 2,500 cases.

Five IACs – Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, Indiana Tax Court, Oklahoma Court of Appeals, Pennsylvania
Commonwealth Court, and Tennessee Court of Appeals – do not have criminal jurisdiction.
7
Funding for the third year would be contingent on the successful completion of the data collection stage.

Implementation Plan

Table 1: Designs, strata, population and sample sizes, costs and effective sample sizes
Differential

Design
1A - Proportional at stage 1
n = 1,000
1A - Proportional at stage 1
n = 1,500
1A - Proportional at stage 1
n = 2,000
1A - Proportional at stage 1
n = 2,500
1B - Proportional at stage 2
n = 1,000
1B - Proportional at stage 2
n = 1,500
1B - Proportional at stage 2
n = 2,000
1B - Proportional at stage 2
n = 2,500
2 - All COLRs
n = 1,000
2 - All COLRs
n = 1,500
2 - All COLRs
n = 2,000
2 - All COLRs
n = 2,500

Type of Court
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total
COLR
IAC
Total

Population
N1h
N2h
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140
52
26,911
91
60,229
143
87,140

n1h
36
64
100
36
64
100
36
64
100
36
64
100
31
69
100
31
69
100
31
69
100
31
69
100
52
48
100
52
48
100
52
48
100
52
48
100

Sample
n2h
360
640
1,000
540
960
1,500
720
1,280
2,000
900
1,600
2,500
310
690
1,000
465
1,035
1,500
620
1,380
2,000
775
1,725
2,500
520
480
1,000
780
720
1,500
1,040
960
2,000
1,300
1,200
2,500

Cost per
Court
C1h
$1,480
$1,760

Cost per
Case
C2h
$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

$1,480
$1,760

$110
$120

Cost Total
C
$92,880
$189,440
$282,320
$112,680
$227,840
$340,520
$132,480
$266,240
$398,720
$152,280
$304,640
$456,920
$79,980
$204,240
$284,220
$97,030
$245,640
$342,670
$114,080
$287,040
$401,120
$131,130
$328,440
$459,570
$134,160
$142,080
$276,240
$162,760
$170,880
$333,640
$191,360
$199,680
$391,040
$219,960
$228,480
$448,440

Weighting Effect
Weff
0.2649
0.7464
1.0114
0.2649
0.7464
1.0114
0.2649
0.7464
1.0114
0.2649
0.7464
1.0114
0.3077
0.6924
1.0000
0.3077
0.6924
1.0000
0.3077
0.6924
1.0000
0.3077
0.6924
1.0000
0.1834
0.9953
1.1787
0.1834
0.9953
1.1787
0.1834
0.9953
1.1787
0.1834
0.9953
1.1787

Effective
Sample
Size
Effn

989

1,483

1,978

2,472

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

848

1,273

1,697

2,121

The national survey will be stratified by type of court (COLR, IAC). Within each major stratum,
courts could be further stratified by size (estimated number of appeals.) Depending on the details
of the final design chosen, some courts may be included in the sample with certainty, and cases
within these courts would be sampled at the overall rate for the study and type of court. The
variations in sample allocations presented in Table 1 introduce some deviations from
proportional allocation, especially for Design 2 where all COLRs are included. Although this
allocation works to the benefit of COLR specific estimates, it works to the detriment of the
precision of overall estimates. The effect of this deviation from proportional allocation is
measured as the design effect due to differential weighting (Weff). The effective sample size, the
last column in Table 1, is calculated as the actual sample size divided by the weighting effect and
is used as a substitute for the simple random sampling (SRS) sample size in precision
calculations. The loss of precision in Design 2 (the inclusion of all COLRs), combined with high
anticipated costs, led to the decision to focus on the proportional sampling frames (Designs 1A
and 1B).
Table 2 presents the precision that would be expected from the effective sample sizes
offered by the remaining proportional designs (Design 1A and Design 1B) for various analytic
scenarios. For each scenario evaluated, Table 2 includes:
•

The postulated population proportion (P)

•

The balance given the proportion (Q = 1-P)

•

The effective sample size (n) – from Table 1

•

The variance of the proportion

•

The standard error of the proportion

•

The relative standard error of the proportion (RSE)

•

The lower and upper confidence interval endpoints (LCI, UCI) on P
Implementation Plan

Note that since the effective sample sizes offered by the proportional designs (designs 1A
and 1B) are very similar, they are represented via the actual sample sizes (a close approximation)
in Table 2. The precision scenarios presented in Table 2 are intended to be illustrative and apply
to both overall estimates and estimates for subgroups (COLRs, IACs.)
Table 2: Precision offered by designs 1A, 1B (approximate sample sizes)
P
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%

Q
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%

n
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,500
1,500
1,500
1,500
1,500
2,000
2,000
2,000
2,000
2,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500

Variance
0.00021
0.00024
0.00025
0.00024
0.00021
0.00014
0.00016
0.00017
0.00016
0.00014
0.00011
0.00012
0.00013
0.00012
0.00011
0.00008
0.00010
0.00010
0.00010
0.00008

Standard Error
0.01449
0.01549
0.01581
0.01549
0.01449
0.01183
0.01265
0.01291
0.01265
0.01183
0.01025
0.01095
0.01118
0.01095
0.01025
0.00917
0.00980
0.01000
0.00980
0.00917

RSE
4.83%
3.87%
3.16%
2.58%
2.07%
3.94%
3.16%
2.58%
2.11%
1.69%
3.42%
2.74%
2.24%
1.83%
1.46%
3.06%
2.45%
2.00%
1.63%
1.31%

LCI
27.16%
36.96%
46.90%
56.96%
67.16%
27.68%
37.52%
47.47%
57.52%
67.68%
27.99%
37.85%
47.81%
57.85%
67.99%
28.20%
38.08%
48.04%
58.08%
68.20%

UCI
32.84%
43.04%
53.10%
63.04%
72.84%
32.32%
42.48%
52.53%
62.48%
72.32%
32.01%
42.15%
52.19%
62.15%
72.01%
31.80%
41.92%
51.96%
61.92%
71.80%

The information presented in Tables 1 and 2 were used to determine that Design 1B
(proportional to caseload) is slightly preferable to Design 1A (proportional to courts). In
particular, the differential weighting effect (Weff) for Design 1B is 1.000, slightly better than the
Weff for Design 1A (1.011).
NCSC recommends using Design 1B to draw the sample of courts and cases.

Implementation Plan

A related issue arose during the advisory board discussion of the sample design: the value
of an oversample of cases heard by both the IAC and the COLR. At issue is whether cases
appealed and heard at both the IAC and COLR can be distinguished from the general population
of IAC appeals. For example, are there different issues in cases solely heard by the IAC versus
those that are eventually addressed by both the IAC and the COLR? An oversample of cases
heard at both levels would permit a number of comparisons that would enable researchers and
practitioners to identify events/issues at the IAC level that may influence subsequent filings at
the COLR.
The current sampling framework involves coding only the case file as it relates to the
particular court. The COLR case is coded, not the underlying IAC case. Since some COLR
cases will have passed through the IACs initially, an opportunity presents itself to collect each
court’s data on a single case. There are some possible data collection economies as a result, and
such cases may be rather unique and interesting analytically. We propose an oversample of such
cases with a sample size of 300—a sample size that provides basic levels of precision, without
adding too much additional costs to or diversion of resources from the primary study. 8
NCSC proposes an oversample of cases from those already selected from the COLR
sample in which the underlying IAC case will be coded.
Design 1B was used to estimate the costs of carrying out the survey. The data below
provide cost options based on (1) sample size, in increments of 500, and (2) an oversample of
300 cases. The minimal expected cost—that of sampling 1,000 cases while excluding the
oversample – is estimated to be $655,000. The oversample raises the cost of sampling 1,000
cases to approximately $700,000. Administrative costs rise as the sample size increases, as
8

For a proportion of 50 percent, a sample size of 300 cases will yield an approximate confidence interval from
roughly 45 to 55 percent.

Implementation Plan

demonstrated by the most costly option of sampling 2,500 cases, which raises the expected cost
to over $1,000,000. A breakdown of costs can be found in Appendix M.

Total Costs
Oversample (300 appeals)
Total Costs with Oversample

n=1,000
$654,892
$42,051
$696,943

n=1,500
$782,446
$42,051
$824,497

n=2,000
$910,002
$42,051
$952,053

n=2,500
$1,037,557
$42,051
$1,079,608

4. Provide technical assistance funds to produce and market deliverables.
Traditionally, BJS grant funds have been used to create large datasets that can be
generalized to the population. Funding generally expires before the grantee can provide
technical assistance and follow-up activities to clarify data issues, increase the visibility of
product deliverables, and assure distribution to the appropriate group of practitioners.
Consequently, the impact of findings from national surveys and their application to practitioners
in the justice field may be diminished. NCSC proposes that BJS consider a new model that will
increase the accuracy, impact, and application of products.
Generally, the review and dissemination process occurs following the conclusion of the
grant. In the past, grant recipients have provided technical assistance to clarify data requests and
to assist with publications, typically at their own expense. This practice limits the amount of
time and effort that can be devoted to assuring accurate and timely products that reach the
practitioner audience. NCSC recommends that the grant period be for three years—with the
third year of technical assistance contingent on the successful completion of the survey. The
following activities would be carried out under the technical assistance component of the grant:
•
•
•
•
•

Responding to data questions,
Providing additional documentation as requested,
Drafting and/or reviewing publications,
Disseminating products to appropriate judicial organizations, and
Participating in conferences or workshops to promote products.
Implementation Plan

Project Implementation Steps and Proposed Timeframe
There are eight primary steps in carrying out a national survey of criminal appeals, as
demonstrated below. Next to each project step is a proposed timeframe for its completion during
the 36-month period. The first 24 months will be used to carry out the survey and deliver the
dataset to BJS. Funding for the final year of the project, contingent on the successful delivery of
the dataset, will focus on technical assistance. See Appendix N for a sample court profile
template.
Month
1

Gain IRB approval
(Data collection instruments may be approved prior to
survey implementation, thereby eliminating this task.)

Gain approval of data
collection instrument
Select sample
Collect data
Develop analysis
Draft court profiles
Deliver dataset to BJS

Month
25

Follow-up Technical
Assistance

Project management will be an ongoing activity throughout the duration of the project. NCSC
recommends continued participation from an advisory board. Ideally, the advisory board should
Implementation Plan

be comprised of members of the following organizations and will serve as a conduit to
practitioners.
•

Conference of Appellate Technology Officers (CATO)

•

National Conference of Appellate Court Clerks (NCACC)

•

Council of Chief Judges of the State Courts of Appeal (CCJSCA)

Additionally, members of the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) and the
Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) should be asked if they would like to appoint a representative
to serve on the board.

Implementation Plan

Appendices9
A.

Courts of Last Resort (COLRs) Sorted by Number of Criminal Appeals

Intermediate Appellate Courts (IACs) Sorted by Number of Criminal Appeals

Appellate Court Process Summary

COLR Coding Form

IAC Coding Form

COLR Coding Instructions

IAC Coding Instructions

Conviction/Charge Codes

Issues on Appeal Codes

Resolution Codes

Miscellaneous Coding Instructions

Caseload Inventory and Record Availability Summary

Estimated Costs and Tasks of Survey Implementation

Sample Court Profile Template

Coding forms, coding instructions, and all coding sheets apply to direct appeals only.

Implementation Plan

Appendix A: COLRs Sorted by Number of Criminal Appeals

CALIFORNIA
NEW YORK
TEXAS
MICHIGAN
LOUISIANA
OKLAHOMA
VIRGINIA
ILLINOIS
NEW JERSEY
NEVADA
OHIO
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
INDIANA
ARIZONA
MASSACHUSETTS
ALABAMA
MISSISSIPPI
COLORADO
IOWA
WASHINGTON
OREGON
NORTH CAROLINA
WISCONSIN
KENTUCKY
MINNESOTA
DELAWARE
ARKANSAS
NEW MEXICO
NEW HAMPSHIRE
HAWAII
MONTANA
MAINE
PUERTO RICO
GEORGIA
WEST VIRGINIA
IDAHO
NORTH DAKOTA
CONNECTICUT
NEBRASKA
WYOMING
SOUTH DAKOTA
VERMONT
RHODE ISLAND
FLORIDA
MARYLAND
UTAH
ALASKA

Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Court of Criminal Appeals
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Court of Criminal Appeals
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Judicial Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Judicial Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court of Appeals
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Supreme Court
Supreme Court

No. of
Criminal
Appeals
3,899
2,525
2,098
1,646
1,559
1,365
1,312
1,298
1,101
1,038
906
662
569
558
542
507
478
457
451
449
410
409
408
386
382
339
312
273
265
240
209
180
175
170
169
165
153
137
132
121
106
104
62
61
58
58
57

Percent
of Total

*Estimate

*Estimate
*Estimate

*Estimate

13.4%
8.7%
7.2%
5.7%
5.4%
4.7%
4.5%
4.5%
3.8%
3.6%
3.1%
2.3%
2.0%
1.9%
1.9%
1.7%
1.6%
1.6%
1.6%
1.5%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.3%
1.3%
1.2%
1.1%
0.9%
0.9%
0.8%
0.7%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%

KANSAS
TENNESSEE
SOUTH CAROLINA
PENNSYLVANIA
MISSOURI

Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Supreme Court

34
29
23
21
10
29,078

Source: NCSC Court Statistics Project (CSP) and state annual reports.

0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%

Appendix B: IACs Sorted by Number of Criminal Appeals

PENNSYLVANIA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
FLORIDA
NEW JERSEY
MICHIGAN
VIRGINIA
ALABAMA
ILLINOIS
CALIFORNIA
FLORIDA
OREGON
CALIFORNIA
WISCONSIN
INDIANA
TEXAS
TENNESSEE
KANSAS
GEORGIA
LOUISIANA
COLORADO
LOUISIANA
CALIFORNIA
NEW YORK
KENTUCKY
MASSACHUSETTS
MINNESOTA
MARYLAND
CALIFORNIA
LOUISIANA
NEW YORK
OHIO
SOUTH CAROLINA
PUERTO RICO
ILLINOIS
CALIFORNIA
OHIO
NORTH
CAROLINA
LOUISIANA
TEXAS
TEXAS
ARIZONA
NEW YORK
OHIO

Superior Court
Second District Court of Appeal
First District Court of Appeal
Fifth District Court of Appeal
Fourth District Court of Appeal
Appellate Division of the Superior Court
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals
Court of Criminal Appeals
Appellate Court, First District
Courts of Appeal, Second Appellate District
Third District Court of Appeal
Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Fifth District
Court of Criminal Appeals
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Fourth Circuit
Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, First Circuit
Courts of Appeal, Third Appellate District
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First
Department
Court of Appeals
Appeals Court
Court of Appeals
Court of Special Appeals
Courts of Appeal, First Appellate District
Courts of Appeal, Third Circuit
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second
Department
Eighth District Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals
Circuit Court of Appeals
Appellate Court, Second District
Courts of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District
First District Court of Appeals

No. of
Criminal
Appeals
4,853
4,129
3,363
3,248
3,152
3,060
2,838
2,471
1,876
1,863
1,826
1,719
1,651
1,571
1,410
1,351
1,211
1,153
1,151
1,079
1,079
1,071
1,053
1,002

Percent
of Total

*Estimate

6.0%
5.1%
4.2%
4.0%
3.9%
3.8%
3.5%
3.1%
2.3%
2.3%
2.3%
2.1%
2.0%
1.9%
1.7%
1.7%
1.5%
1.4%
1.4%
1.3%
1.3%
1.3%
1.3%
1.2%

858

1.1%

854
845
825
820
814
800

1.1%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%

784

1.0%

763
751
748
672
671
670

*Estimate

0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.8%
0.8%
0.8%

Court of Appeals

669

0.8%

Courts of Appeal, Second Circuit
Courts of Appeal, First District
Courts of Appeal, Fourteenth District
Court of Appeals, Division 1
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth
Department
Fifth District Court of Appeals

657
649
641
636

0.8%
0.8%
0.8%
0.8%

602

0.7%

594

0.7%

WASHINGTON
OHIO
LOUISIANA
NEBRASKA
ILLINOIS
IDAHO
WASHINGTON
TEXAS
OHIO
NEW YORK
CALIFORNIA
ILLINOIS
MISSOURI
NEW MEXICO
NEW YORK
ARKANSAS
TEXAS
OHIO
TEXAS
OHIO
TEXAS
TEXAS
OHIO
OHIO
WASHINGTON
ALASKA
MISSOURI
OHIO
ARIZONA
TEXAS
TEXAS
TEXAS
MISSISSIPPI
OHIO
ILLINOIS
IOWA
TEXAS
CONNECTICUT
MISSOURI
UTAH
TEXAS
TEXAS
OHIO
HAWAII
NEW YORK
NORTH DAKOTA

Court of Appeals, Division Two
Second District Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals
Appellate Court, Fourth District
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals, Division One
Courts of Appeal, Second District
Tenth District Court of Appeals
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, 2nd, 8th, 9th, 10th
& 11th Judicial Districts
Courts of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District
Appellate Court, Third District
Court of Appeals, Eastern Division
Court of Appeals
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third
Department
Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Third District
Twelfth District Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Thirteenth District
Ninth District Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Fourth District
Courts of Appeal, Seventh District
Third District Court of Appeals
Sixth District Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals, Division Three
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals, Western Division
Eleventh District Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals, Division 2
Courts of Appeal, Sixth District
Courts of Appeal, Twelfth District
Courts of Appeal, Ninth District
Court of Appeals
Fourth District Court of Appeals
Appellate Court, Fifth District
Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Tenth District
Appellate Court
Court of Appeals, Southern Division
Court of Appeals
Courts of Appeal, Eleventh District
Courts of Appeal, Eighth District
Seventh District Court of Appeals
Intermediate Court of Appeals
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Judicial
Department
Court of Appeals

Source: NCSC Court Statistics Project (CSP) and state annual reports.

582
581
579
570
547
545
538
521
501

*Estimate

0.7%
0.7%
0.7%
0.7%
0.7%
0.7%
0.7%
0.6%
0.6%

482

0.6%

467
455
446
423

0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.5%

415

0.5%

410
400
396
395
386
383
367
349
345
340
336
306
299
287
286
275
271
257
250
247
244
233
227
219
219
198
184
179
131

0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%

75
80,649

*Estimate

0.1%
0.0%

Appellate Court Process Summary
Appeal as of Right

Appeal by Permission

Appellant files
document taking
appeal

Document granting
permission

Opposition
documents
filed

Documents filed
requesting
review

Appeal Initiated
Review of timeliness,
aggrievement &
appealability: sua sponte
or on motion

Yes

End

Should review be
granted?

Document
dismissing for
procedural defect

No
Was appeal timely,
is appellant
aggrieved, & is
judgment/order
appealable?

Document denying
permission

Document
dismissing
appeal

Yes

Alternate Process:
Direct merits decision
on appeal without
briefing

Preparation
of record &
transmission
to reviewing
court

Yes

Initial
review:
Is record
correct &
timely?

End

Yes

Can it be
fixed?

Untimely perfection:
document dismissing
appeal

End

Untimely perfection or
other procedural defect:
document dismissing
appeal

End

Yes
Record Complete

Appellant’s brief
filed

Did
appellant
file brief?

Yes

Appeal Perfected

Appellee’s brief
filed

Did
appellee
file brief?

Yes

Document imposing
preclusion or other
sanction

At any time prior
to release of
decision, appeal
may be
withdrawn,
settled by parties,
or transferred by
court

Briefing Complete
Document
withdrawing,
approving
settlement of, or
transferring
appeal

Calendaring and internal preparation for review by court

Argument or Submission to Court

End

Deliberation and decision writing

Release of Decision

Merits Determination
Judgment/order appealed is:

Affirmed

Reversed

Full Opinion

Procedural
Determination

Dismissed, permission
revoked, or other

Modified

Memorandum

Summary
Disposition
Ver.: 20070621

NCSC Coding Form

ID#:__________________

Appendix D: COLR Coding Form for the Criminal Appeals Study
Court of Last Resort
[Court Name]
Defendant Last Name: ____________________________
Trial Court Case Number: ____________________________
Trial Court County, State: _________________________
Intermediate Appellate Court Case Number: ____________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Court of Last Resort Docket Number: _______________________
No Opinion (N/A)
8. Type of Decision:
Full Opinion
2. Petitioner (from Trial Court case):
State
Defendant
Majority #Concurring _______
Transfer from IAC
#Dissenting (with reason) ________
3. Is it an appeal from:
Conviction
Sentence Both
Memorandum
Summary/Dispositional Order
4. Appeal milestones:
DATE:
Other Opinion
a. Appeal requested:
______/______/______
DK
b. Appeal granted/denied:
______/______/______
DK
9. Total # of issues addressed by Opinion: ____
Opinion Pending
c. Initiated Documentation: ______/______/_______ DK
a. Issue 1
b. Issue 2
d. Record filed:
e. Transcript filed:

______/______/______
______/______/_____

DK
DK

f. Petitioner brief filed:
g. Respondent brief filed:

______/______/______
______/______/______

DK
DK

h. Reply briefs: (list additional on back)
DK
______/______/______
Petitioner
Respondent
DK
______/______/______
i. Amicus briefs filed? Yes
j. Briefing Completed:
k. Oral argument:
l. Decision/Disposition:

5. Type of Conviction: _________
DK
Capital Felony
Non-Capital Felony
6.

DK
DK

______/______/______
______/______/______
______/______/______

a. 1 issue on appeal: _______
rd
c. 3 issue on appeal: _______
th
e. 5 issue on appeal: _______

1. Issue addressed _____
2. Resolution
_____
c. Issue 3
1. Issue addressed _____
2. Resolution
_____
e. Issue 5
1. Issue addressed _____
2. Resolution
_____
10. Present status of appeal:

Closed

Pending

11. Request to reconsider/rehear:
DK
None (skip to Q12)
a. ____/____/____
b. Reconsideration/rehearing granted?:
Yes
No

DK
DK
DK

Misdemeanor

1. Issue addressed _____
2. Resolution
_____
d. Issue 4
1. Issue addressed _____
2. Resolution
_____
f. Issue 6
1. Issue addressed _____
2. Resolution
_____

brief:_______
nd
b. 2 issue on appeal: ______
th
d. 4 issue on appeal: ______
th
f. 6 issue on appeal: ______

7. Appellate court disposition (Check all that apply):
a. Review/transfer not granted or dismissed due to:
Appeal improvidently granted
Lack of jurisdiction
Denied (discretionary review)
Procedural Error
No valid issue on appeal
Unknown
b. Appeal withdrawn before decision:
By petitioner
Transfer/certified to IAC
Unknown
c.
Affirmed in whole
d.
Reversed in whole (explain effect below)
e.
Reversed in part (explain effect below)
f.
Remanded (explain effect below)
g.
Conviction/sentence modified (explain effect below)
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________

12. Any further appeal?:
a.
Yes
No (explain) ______________________________
_____________________________________________________
13.

Public defender/court appointed
pro se / pro per
Name: ____________________________________________
City & State: __________________________, ______
Phone: (________) ________ - __________

14. State counsel (lead counsel or counsel of record):
Name: ____________________________________________
City & State: __________________________, ______
Phone: (________) ________ - __________
Please use the back of this form to state additional comments
about this case, including any deviations from typical appeal
processing.
[OMB language here]

_ Date: ______/______/________

October 21, 2009

NCSC Coding Form

ID#:__________________

Appendix E: IAC Coding Form for the Criminal Appeals Study
Intermediate Appellate Court
[Court Name]
Defendant Last Name: _______________________________
Trial Court County, State: ____________________________
Trial Court Case Number:___________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Appellate Court Docket Number: _______________________
8. Type of Decision:
Full Opinion
No Opinion (N/A)
Memorandum
2. Appellant (from Trial Court case):
State
Defendant
Summary/Dispositional Order
3. Is it an appeal from:
Other Opinion
Conviction
Sentence Both
9. Total # of issues addressed by Opinion: _____
Opinion Pending
4. Appeal milestones:
DATE:
a.
Issue
1
b. Issue 2
a. Initiated Documentation: ______/______/______
DK
1. Issue addressed _____
1. Issue addressed _____
2.
Resolution
_____
2. Resolution
_____
b. Record filed:
______/______/______ DK
d.
Issue
4
c.
Issue
3
c. Transcript filed:
______/______/_____
DK
1. Issue addressed _____
1. Issue addressed _____
2.
Resolution
_____
2. Resolution
_____
d. Appellant brief filed:
______/______/______ DK
e.
Issue
5
f. Issue 6
e. Appellee brief filed:
______/______/______ DK
1. Issue addressed _____
1. Issue addressed _____
2. Resolution
_____
2. Resolution
_____
f. Reply briefs: (list additional on back)
DK
______/______/_____
DK
Appellant
10. Present status of appeal: Closed Pending
Appellee
DK
______/______/______ DK
g. Briefing Completed:

______/______/_______

h. Oral argument:

______/______/______

i. Decision/Disposition:

______/______/______

5. Type of Conviction: _________
DK
Capital Felony
Non-Capital Felony
6.

a. 1 issue on appeal: _______
rd
c. 3 issue on appeal: _______
th
e. 5 issue on appeal: _______

11. Request to reconsider/rehear:
DK
None (skip to Q13)
a. ____/____/____
b. Reconsideration/rehearing granted?:
Yes
No

Misdemeanor

brief:_______
nd
b. 2 issue on appeal:______
th
d. 4 issue on appeal: ______
th
f. 6 issue on appeal: ______

7. Appellate court disposition (Check all that apply):
a. Review/transfer not granted or dismissed due to:
Appeal improvidently granted
Lack of jurisdiction
Denied (discretionary review)
Procedural Error
No valid issue on appeal
Unknown
b. Appeal withdrawn before decision:
By appellant
Transfer/certified to COLR
Unknown
Affirmed in whole
c.
d.
Reversed in whole (explain effect below)
e.
Reversed in part (explain effect below)
f.
Remanded (explain effect below)
g.
Conviction/sentence modified (explain effect below)
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________

12. Appealed to State Court of Last Resort?:
a. Yes
No (skip to Q13)
DK
b. Date: _____/_____/_____
DK
c. Petition granted? Yes
No
DK
d. Date: _____/_____/_____
DK
13.

Public defender/court appointed
pro se / pro per
Name: ____________________________________________
City & State: __________________________ , ______
Phone: (________) ________ - __________

14. State counsel (lead counsel or counsel of record):
Name: ____________________________________________
City & State: __________________________ , ______
Phone: (________) ________ - __________
Please use the back of this form to state additional comments
about this case, including any deviations from typical appeal
processing.
[OMB language here]

_ Date: ______/______/_______
October 21, 2009

Appendix F: COLR Coding Instructions
GENERAL CODING INSTRUCTIONS
COURT OF LAST RESORT CODING FORM
Thank you for agreeing to assist the National Center for State Courts (NCSC)
and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) with this very important project. We cannot
emphasize enough how crucial it is that you read and understand all of these
instructions because many questions that may arise will be answered by the following
information. Please be sure to code each case as accurately, consistently, and
completely as possible. We have included two sample coding forms at the end of these
instructions. They have been completed in a manner consistent with these instructions.
Please refer to them as you read these instructions. To assure complete and accurate
data, please abide by the following basic rules for coding:
Every case coded for this study must be a direct appeal of a criminal
case (i.e., capital felony, non-capital felony, misdemeanor) in which a
verdict or judgment was entered in a trial court.
A direct appeal occurs when the defendant 1) appeals the final judgment of a
trial court to an intermediate appellate court, 2) appeals the final judgment of
a trial court to a court of last resort, or 3) appeals the final judgment of a trial
court to a court of last resort following an appeal to an intermediate appellate
court. The appeal can be taken either by right or by permission and can be
The state may also file a direct appeal in some instances, e.g., the state may

Notes:
a. If you discover a case on the list that was not appealed (i.e., no notice
given to the appellate court), please make a note of the case name
and number and notify the NCSC. If for any reason you cannot locate
a case or if a case on the list does not seem to fit the description of the
sample (i.e., a direct criminal appeal filed during 2008), please notify
the NCSC for further instructions.
b. If a case was dismissed for procedural error and a subsequent appeal
was filed, we are interested in the subsequent appeal only if that
resolved the case on the merits. If the subsequent appeal results in a
second dismissal for procedural error, exclude the second appeal and
only code the first appeal.
When in doubt about how to code something, please call the National
Center for State Courts (NCSC). Please do not guess how to code
something. It is strongly encouraged that you code two or three appeals
and then call your court liaison to discuss the coding process and ask any
questions that arose. While coding, keep a list of questions (and the docket
number that is affected), then call [appropriate project staff name] toll-free at

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR)

Page 1

October 21, 2009

1-800-616-6109 Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Eastern
Time.
Write CLEARLY!
o Shape your numbers and letters CLEARLY and DISTINCTLY. This is a
very important way to ensure that the data are entered, stored, and
reported accurately.
o Use a PENCIL so you can erase and re-enter the data clearly, if
necessary.
o See the SAMPLE CODING FORMS for examples.
Code each item accurately.
o If the item requires checking a box, be certain that you check the one that
you intend to check.
o Be certain that you write the numbers for DATES in the correct order. For
example, July 1, 2008 should be coded as: 7 / 1 / 08 (month/ day/ year).
If this is coded 1 / 7 / 08, it will create an error of 6 months.
o See the included Miscellaneous Coding Instructions document for
additional examples of scenarios that you may encounter while coding.
Use those examples as a supplement to, rather than as a substitute for,
the instructions provided below.
If the data item DID NOT OCCUR (e.g., no reply briefs were filed), write
. However, if the event DID OCCUR, but you DON'T
KNOW the answer (e.g., you know that a request to reconsider/rehear was
in
made, but you do not know if it was granted), mark "DK"
the checkbox provided
make every attempt to
find and enter the correct information.
If there is something peculiar or particularly interesting about the case,
please include comments on the back of the coding form, including an
explanation of how you determined codes for the case. This detail will assist
the NCSC and BJS in analyzing the data that you provide about each appeal.

SPECIFIC DATA ITEMS
In this study, we are only collecting information about direct appeals of a criminal
case (i.e., capital felony, non-capital felony, misdemeanor) in which a verdict or
judgment was entered in a trial court. For the purpose of this study, do not include
appeals of cases that are not included on the list provided to you by the NCSC. If you
find a case that you believe should be included in the study, please notify the NCSC for
further instructions.
Write the last name of the defendant in the trial court case. If
there was more than one defendant write the last name of the defendant that filed the
current appeal.

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR)

Page 2

October 21, 2009

Trial Court County, State: Write the county and state of the trial court from which the
case was appealed.
Trial Court Case Number: Write the number assigned to the trial court case. Be sure
to record the complete number, including any prefixes or suffixes. (The appellate court
docket numbers, to be completed below and in Question 1, will be different than the
Trial Court case number recorded here.)
Intermediate Appellate Court Case Number: Write the number assigned to the
intermediate appellate court case. Be sure to record the complete number, including
any prefixes or suffixes. (The Court of Last Resort docket number, to be completed in
Question 1 below, will be different than both the Trial Court case number [reported
above] and the Intermediate Appellate Court case number recorded here.)
1. Court of Last Resort Docket Number: Write the number assigned to the appeal by
the Court of Last Resort (COLR). Be sure to record the complete number, including any
prefixes or suffixes. (The Court of Last Resort docket number will be different than the
Trial Court and Intermediate Appellate Court case numbers that you recorded above.)
2. Petitioner (from Trial Court case): Check the box next to the party who filed this
appeal. Please note that both parties may appeal the same or different issues (e.g. the
defendant may appeal a judgment for the State, while the State may appeal an
interlocutory ruling of the court).
Note: for the purposes of this project, references to the party initiating the
petitioner
appellant. Similarly, for purposes of this project, references to the party
respondent
responding to the initial petitioner
this party as the appellee. The use of appellant and appellee will be reserved
for parties at the Intermediate Appellate Court.
In some instances, neither the petitioner nor respondent has filed the appeal; instead,
the Intermediate Appellate Court has decided not to resolve the issues of the appeal
and transfers or certifies the case to the Court of Last Resort. The Court of Last Resort
may also decide that the issues on appeal have important policy implications so they
decide to transfer the case from the Intermediate Appellate Court prior to that court
making a decision in the case. If the case was transferred or certified by the
box.
3. Is it an appeal from: Conviction, Sentence, Both: Record the phase of the trial
court criminal case from which the appeal is being taken.
4. Appeal Milestones: Write the date that each of the following events occurred. If
the event has not yet occurred or if the appeal was withdrawn, abandoned, dismissed or
otherwise terminated before the event was necessary, enter
NO to indicate the
event did not occur. While it is likely that these events will occur chronologically in the
order they appear on the coding form, they will not necessarily occur in this order.

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR)

Page 3

October 21, 2009

a) Appeal requested: write the date on which the Petitioner filed a request for
certiorari or review of a trial court or an IAC decision.
b) Appeal granted/denied: write the date on which the COLR granted or denied

c) Initiated Documentation: write the date on which the appellate court first
received jurisdiction of this case. This date will usually be the date that the notice
of appeal is filed or docketed with the appellate court. If the petitioner mistakenly
filed the notice of appeal with the wrong court, and the notice of appeal was
forwarded to the proper court, write the date on which the appropriate court
received the notice. If there is no notice of appeal date listed, and if this court
utilizes docketing statements, write the date on which the docketing statement
was filed. A docketing statement is a form filed by the petitioner and often used
by the court for scheduling and assignment purposes. Some courts use other
ment of the

d) Record filed: write the date on which the complete trial court record was
filed with the COLR (excluding the transcript). If the parties filed a joint statement
of the case (or some other abbreviated record) in lieu of a complete trial record,
note the date on which this statement was filed. At times there may be multiple
record submissions. If this is the case, use the latest date to indicate when the
COLR received the full record.
e) Transcript filed: write the date on which the complete transcript was
received by the COLR. If the transcript is not recorded separately, but is part of
the record, use the date the court received the record.
f) Petitioner brief filed: write the date on which the petitioner filed its brief with
the COLR. For this question, we are interested only in briefs on the merits of the
appeal. Do not include briefs supporting or opposing any preliminary motions,
such as motions for temporary stays of the trial court judgment.
g) Respondent brief filed: write the date on which the respondent filed its
response brief with the COLR. For this question, we are interested only in briefs
that respond to the petitioner
on the merits of the appeal. Do not include
briefs supporting or opposing any preliminary motions, such as motions for
temporary stays of the trial court judgment.
h) Reply briefs: write the dates on which any reply briefs were filed with the
COLR. Be sure to assign the date of the brief to the appropriate party (petitioner
or respondent). If the parties filed more than one reply brief, indicate the filing
date and filing party on the back of the coding form, labeling each clearly as reply
briefs. If a reply brief is filed and you know the date, but do not know which party
Likewise, if you know that
the petitioner filed the brief, but you do not know the date of the brief, mark the

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR)

Page 4

October 21, 2009

i) Amicus briefs filed?:
this case. An amicus brief is a brief filed by a person or group that is not a party
to the case.
j) Briefing Completed: write the date on which all petitioner and respondent
briefs were submitted to the COLR in preparation for oral arguments or decision.
If there are different dates for fully briefed and submitted, please use the latest
date to indicate when all documents are submitted to the appellate court. Do not
include the filing of amicus briefs in this calculation as the briefs of interest are
those filed by the parties to the case.
k) Oral argument: write the date on which oral arguments were held before the
COLR.
were held because the appeal was withdrawn, dismissed, or otherwise
terminated before oral arguments were necessary. If there are multiple dates
listed in which oral arguments were heard, list the latest date on record.
l) Decision/Disposition: write the date on which the COLR issued a final
decision for the appeal OR the date on which the appeal was dismissed. Do not
include the dates on which the court decided motions or preliminary issues.
5. Type of Conviction (use codes): Using the attached list of crime codes, indicate
the category that accurately captures the most severe crime for which the defendant
was convicted. There are five primary conviction categories. The first digit reflects the
general category of the crime and the second digit indicates a more detailed subcategory. For purposes of determining the severity of the crime, the general, but not
definitive, rule is that the lower the first digit number, the more severe the offense.
Attempted offenses are included within each crime type (i.e., it is implied that, for
example, conviction/charge code 20 includes attempted burglary). If Conviction code
o explain the offense on the back of the
page.
Indicate the level of severity for the offense by marking one of the following boxes:
Capital Felony, Non-Capital Felony, or Misdemeanor. Be sure to indicate the
severity of the offense even if the conviction offense cannot be identified.
A felony should be classified as a capital felony only if the defendant has been
sentenced to death.
Note: Do not assume the level of severity of an offense since, with limited
exceptions, these offenses may be classified as a felony or a misdemeanor
depending upon state statute. Look to the statement of facts or the opinion to
see if either document specifies the conviction type and/or the level of severity
of the offense.
6. Total # of issues presented in the petitioner initial brief: Indicate the total
number of issues raised on appeal by the petitioner in the petitioner
. We
are only interested in issues that were actually briefed. This information should
therefore be obtained from the briefs only; do not tally the number of errors assigned by
the petitioner in the notice of appeal or other preliminary documents.
Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR)

Page 5

October 21, 2009

6a thru 6f: Issue on appeal (use codes): Using the attached list of issue
codes, indicate the category that accurately captures the legal issue presented in the
petitioner
here are eight primary categories for issue on appeal. The first
digit reflects the general category of the issue and the second digit indicates a more
detailed sub-category. If Issue code 9
) is used, be sure to
explain the error on the back of the page. In addition, please note the type of error on
These codes
will
in
Question 9, but note that the issues raised in the briefs may or may not be the same
issues that are addressed by the court in the opinion.
The total number of issues entered must match the number coded for Question
6(a) thru 6(f), unless the petitioner raises more than six issues on appeal. For this
question, we are interested only in the first six issues raised (listed in the order they
brief raises more than six issues, code only the first
six issues
Question 6 and list
3 codes for Questions 6a, 6b, and 6c. If there are 8 issues on
8
Question 6 but list only the first 6 codes for Questions 6a through 6f.
7. Appellate court disposition: Check the manner in which the appeal was resolved
at the COLR. While it is possible that only one option will apply to a case, the options
listed are not necessarily mutually exclusive; please check all options that apply.
Please be thorough and precise when coding the dispositions. If the appeal is still
pending, skip to Question 10 and check the box marked Pending.
a. Review/transfer not granted or dismissed due to:
Appeal improvidently granted the appeal was initially accepted by the
court, but it was later determined that the appeal should have been rejected
for some reason. Typically this code will be used for appellate courts with
discretionary (or by permission) jurisdiction over criminal cases.
Lack of jurisdiction

the appeal was dismissed because it was filed in the

matter or there is a lack of jurisdiction because the trial court has issues
pending and thus still has jurisdiction over the case.
Denied (discretionary review) the case is a by permission appeal
(meaning that the court has discretionary jurisdiction over the appeal), and
the court denies review.
Procedural error a procedural error prevents COLR review of the issues
raised. For example, the petitioner missed the deadline for filing a notice of
appeal. This option also includes appeals that are extinguished by the filing
of a timely post-verdict motion in the trial court.
No valid issue on appeal the notice of appeal did not allege a reviewable
error. Trial court decisions may only be appealed if the errors were
prejudicial, were preserved during trial, and were identified and explained in
an appellate brief. If a notice of appeal fails to allege that the error was
Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR) Page 6
October 21, 2009

prejudicial, or if the errors alleged were not objected to during trial, then the
appeal fail
thus there are
questions

Unknown the appeal was not accepted, but the reason underlying the
rejection is not apparent.
b. Appeal withdrawn before decision:
By petitioner
an opinion.

the petitioner withdrew the appeal before the COLR issued

Transfer/certified to IAC Intermediate Appellate Court before review by the COLR. For example, this
may occur when a COLR transfers a case to the IAC due to the IACs current
handling of several appeals with errors related to those raised by the current
appeal.
Note: the transfer or certification of a case to the IAC is a disposition
for the case, but it does not resolve the issues on appeal. As such, if
this disposition is chosen there will not be an opinion written in the
8.
Unknown the appeal was clearly withdrawn and is no longer pending, but
the withdrawing party is unknown.
c. Affirmed in whole: the COLR affirmed the entire trial court decision or
judgment.
d. Reversed in whole: the COLR reversed the entire trial court decision or
in whole Be sure to
judgment. Include here any judgments that are
explain the effect of the reversal in the space below.
e. Reversed in part: the COLR reversed only part(s) of the trial court decision
or judgment
here any judgments that are
in part Be sure to explain the effect of
the reversal in the space below.
f. Remanded: the court sent the case back to the lower court for additional
proceedings. Check this even if the lower court will revisit only some of the
issues. Be sure to explain the effect of the remand in the space below. Do
reasons for remanding the case; include only the effect of
the remand, (e.g., Remand to the trial court for a new trial, in light of the improper
jury verdict forms.) If the court reversed the trial court decision in whole or in part
and remanded the case, check both (f) remanded and (d) or (e).
g. Conviction/sentence modified: This option is applicable if the COLR
modified th
issue without remanding the
case. A separate issue may be remanded and coded as such. Be sure to
explain the effect of the modification, below
reasons for modification here; include only the effect of the modification, (e.g.,
Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR) Page 7
October 21, 2009

Sentence reduced from 2.5 years to 1.5 years). If the court reversed the trial
court decision in whole or in part and modified the conviction or sentence, check
both (g) modified and (d) or (e).
8. Type of Decision: Indicate the form
An opinion on the
merits is one in which the court has considered the arguments of the parties, either
following oral arguments or based on a review of the briefs only (i.e., in a judicial
conference). If the court does not consider the merits of the appeal (i.e., there is no
resolution of the issues in the case),
(Question 8) and DO NOT
code any issues in Question 9.
Full Opinion: The appellate court produces an expansive discussion and
elaboration of the merits of the case or the defect or procedural error. The

Memorandum: The appellate court produces a limited discussion of the merits of
the case or the procedural determination. The discussion will only include some

Summary/Dispositional Order: The appellate court produces a document that
has no discussion of the facts or merits of the case, or no discussion of the

Other Opinion: if the type of decision is not listed above. Use this sparingly.
No Opinion: The appellate court did not issue an opinion on the merits of the
case.
9. Total # of issues addressed by Opinion: Indicate the total number of issues
addressed by the court in the dispositive opinion.
checkbox if the appeal is currently awaiting the release of the final opinion. If the
opinion is released at a later date, please return to this question to complete the coding.
1. Issue Addressed: Using the attached list of issue codes, indicate the
category that accurately captures the legal issue addressed by the court.
There are eight
reflects the general category of the issue and the second digit indicates a
more detailed sub-category. If Issue code 9
be sure to explain the error on the back of the page. In addition, please note
codes are used. These issues may or may not be the same issues presented
in the petitioner
6.
The total number of issues entered must match the number coded for
Question 9(a) thru 9(f), unless the opinion addresses more than six issues on
appeal. For this question, we are interested only in the first six issues raised
(listed in the order they appear in the opinion). If the opinion addresses more
than six issues, code only the first six issues. For example, if there are 3
issues on appeal, wri
9 and list 3 codes for Questions 9a(1),
Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR) Page 8
October 21, 2009

9b(1), and 9c(1)
list only the first 6 codes for Questions 9a through 9f.

9 but

2. Resolution: Enter the appropriate resolution using the attached list of five
codes for each of the issues
.
resolution only for opinions that are dispositional in nature. If Resolution code
) is used, be sure to explain the
other resolution on the back of the page.
10. Present status of appeal: Indicate whether the appeal has been closed (for any
reason) or is still pending. An appeal is considered closed only if the court has issued a
final order or opinion dismissing or resolving the appeal. This includes appeals that are
dismissed at the request of either party. If the appeal is STILL PENDING, skip to
Question 13. If any further appeal is pending, the case should be considered closed at
the COLR.
11. Request to reconsider/rehear:
a. If applicable, write the first date on which either party requested that the
COLR
and skip to Question 12. Do not answer this question if the COLR has not yet
issued a decision for this case or if the deadline to move for reconsideration
or rehearing has not yet expired (a motion could still be filed).
b. Reconsideration/rehearing granted: if you recorded a date for part a,
indicate whether the COLR granted the request to rehear or reconsider the
appeal. If a decision was made, but you are unsure of the results, mark the
no request for
reconsideration/rehearing was made, do not check either box. If the court
modified its original judgment after rehearing or reconsideration, please note
the effect of the modification on the back of this coding form.
12. Any further appeal?: Identify the court and status, if known, of any additional
appeals initiated by either party.
13. Defendant
Write the name, address, and telephone number of the
defendant
COLR appeal. If the defendant has more than one attorney
simultaneously, write the name and contact information that appears first in the COLR
record. If the defendant changed counsel during the COLR appeal, write the name and
contact information of the most recent attorney. Please check if the defendant was
assigned either a public defender or court appointed counsel. If the defendant does not
defendant
contact information. An attorney representing him or herself is NOT considered pro se
(in this situation, write the name and contact information of the defendant).
14. State counsel:
counsel for the COLR appeal. If the state has more than one attorney simultaneously,
write the name and contact information of the lead counsel or counsel of record.
Please use the back of this form to state additional comments about this case,
including any deviations from typical appeal processing: On the back of the coding
Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR)

Page 9

October 21, 2009

form, please list any additional information that might be useful in understanding the
appeal, particularly any unique processing events.
Please print your initials and date each coding form as it is
completed.

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (COLR)

Page 10

October 21, 2009

Appendix G: IAC Coding Instructions
GENERAL CODING INSTRUCTIONS
INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT CODING FORM
Thank you for agreeing to assist the National Center for State Courts (NCSC)
and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) with this very important project. We cannot
emphasize enough how crucial it is that you read and understand all of these
instructions because many questions that may arise will be answered by the following
information. Please be sure to code each case as accurately, consistently, and
completely as possible. We have included two sample coding forms at the end of these
instructions. They have been completed in a manner consistent with these instructions.
Please refer to them as you read these instructions. To assure complete and accurate
data, please abide by the following basic rules for coding:
Every case coded for this study must be a direct appeal of a criminal
case (i.e., capital felony, non-capital felony, misdemeanor) in which a
verdict or judgment was entered in a trial court.
A direct appeal occurs when the defendant 1) appeals the final judgment of a
trial court to an intermediate appellate court, 2) appeals the final judgment of
a trial court to a court of last resort, or 3) appeals the final judgment of a trial
court to a court of last resort following an appeal to an intermediate appellate
court. The appeal can be taken either by right or by permission and can be
The state may also file a direct appeal in some instances, e.g., the state may

Notes:
a. If you discover a case on the list that was not appealed (i.e., no notice
given to the appellate court), please make a note of the case name
and number and notify the NCSC. If for any reason you cannot locate
a case or if a case on the list does not seem to fit the description of the
sample (i.e., a direct criminal appeal filed during 2008), please notify
the NCSC for further instructions.
b. If a case was dismissed for procedural error and a subsequent appeal
was filed, we are interested in the subsequent appeal only if that
resolved the case on the merits. If the subsequent appeal results in a
second dismissal for procedural error, exclude the second appeal and
only code the first appeal.
When in doubt about how to code something, please call the NCSC.
Please do not guess how to code something. It is strongly encouraged that
you code two or three appeals and then call your court liaison to discuss the
coding process and ask any questions that arose. While coding, keep a list of
questions (and the docket number that is affected), then call [appropriate
project staff name] toll-free at 1-800-616-6109 Monday through Friday, 8:30
a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time.

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 1

October 21, 2009

Write CLEARLY!
o Shape your numbers and letters CLEARLY and DISTINCTLY. This is a
very important way to ensure that the data are entered, stored, and
reported accurately.
o Use a PENCIL so you can erase and re-enter the data clearly, if
necessary.
o See the SAMPLE CODING FORMS for examples.
Code each item accurately.
o If the item requires checking a box, be certain that you check the one that
you intend to check.
o Be certain that you write the numbers for DATES in the correct order. For
example, July 1, 2008 should be coded as: 7 / 1 / 08 (month/ day/ year).
If this is coded 1 / 7 / 08, it will create an error of 6 months.
o See the included Miscellaneous Coding Instructions document for
additional examples of scenarios that you may encounter while coding.
Use those examples as a supplement to, rather than as a substitute for,
the instructions provided below.
If the data item DID NOT OCCUR (e.g., no reply briefs were filed), write
. However, if the event DID OCCUR, but you DON'T
KNOW the answer (e.g., you know that the case was appealed to the Court of
Last Resort but do not know on what date the appeal was requested), mark
"DK"
in the checkbox provided
sparingly make every attempt to find and enter the correct information.
If there is something peculiar or particularly interesting about the case,
please include comments on the back of the coding form, including an
explanation of how you determined codes for the case. This detail will assist
the NCSC and BJS in analyzing the data that you provide about each appeal.

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 2

October 21, 2009

Trial Court Case Number: Write the number assigned to the trial court case. Be sure
to record the complete number, including any prefixes or suffixes. (The appellate court
docket number, to be completed in Question 1 below, will be different than the Trial
Court case number recorded here.)
1. Appellate Court Docket Number: Write the number assigned to the appeal by the
Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC). Be sure to record the complete number, including
any prefixes or suffixes. (The appellate court docket number will be different than the
Trial Court case number that you recorded above.)
2. Appellant (from Trial Court case): Check the box next to the party who filed this
appeal. Please note that both parties may appeal the same or different issues (e.g. the
defendant may appeal a judgment for the State, while the State may appeal an
interlocutory ruling of the court).
Note: for the purposes of this project, references to the party initiating the
appellant
petitioner. Similarly, for purposes of this project, references to the party
appellee
party as the respondent. The use of petitioner and respondent will be
reserved for parties at the Court of Last Resort.
3. Is it an appeal from: Conviction, Sentence, Both: Record the phase of the trial
court criminal case from which the appeal is being taken.
4. Appeal Milestones: Write the date that each of the following events occurred. If
the event has not yet occurred or if the appeal was withdrawn, abandoned, dismissed or
otherwise terminated before the event was necessary, enter
NO to indicate the
event did not occur. While it is likely that these events will occur chronologically in the
order they appear on the coding form, they will not necessarily occur in this order.
a) Initiated Documentation: write the date on which the appellate court first
received jurisdiction of this case. This date will usually be the date that the notice
of appeal is filed or docketed with the appellate court. If the appellant mistakenly
filed the notice of appeal with the wrong court, and the notice of appeal was
forwarded to the proper court, write the date on which the appropriate court
received the notice. If there is no notice of appeal date listed, and if this court
utilizes docketing statements, write the date on which the docketing statement
was filed. A docketing statement is a form filed by the appellant and often used
by the court for scheduling and assignment purposes. Some courts use other

b) Record filed: write the date on which the complete trial court record was
filed with the IAC (excluding the transcript). If the parties filed a joint statement of
the case (or some other abbreviated record) in lieu of a complete trial record,
note the date on which this statement was filed. At times there may be multiple
record submissions. If this is the case, use the latest date to indicate when the
IAC received the full record.

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 3

October 21, 2009

c) Transcript filed: write the date on which the complete transcript was
received by the IAC. If the transcript is not recorded separately, but is part of the
record, use the date the court received the record.
d) Appellant brief filed: write the date on which the appellant filed its brief with
the IAC. For this question, we are interested only in briefs on the merits of the
appeal. Do not include briefs supporting or opposing any preliminary motions,
such as motions for temporary stays of the trial court judgment.
e) Appellee brief filed: write the date on which the appellee filed its response
brief with the IAC. For this question, we are interested only in briefs that respond
on the merits of the appeal. Do not include briefs
supporting or opposing any preliminary motions, such as motions for temporary
stays of the trial court judgment.
f) Reply briefs: write the dates on which any reply briefs were filed with the IAC.
Be sure to assign the date of the brief to the appropriate party (appellant or
appellee). If the parties filed more than one reply brief, indicate the filing date
and filing party on the back of the coding form, labeling each clearly as reply
briefs. If a reply brief is filed and you know the date, but do not know which party
filed the b
Likewise, if you know that
the appellant filed the brief, but you do not know the date of the brief, mark the

g) Briefing Completed: write the date on which all appellant and appellee
briefs were submitted to the IAC in preparation for oral arguments or decision. If
there are different dates for fully briefed and submitted, please use the latest date
to indicate when all documents are submitted to the appellate court. Do not
include the filing of amicus briefs in this calculation as the briefs of interest are
those filed by the parties to the case.
Note: an amicus brief is a brief filed by a person or group that is not a
party to the case.
h) Oral argument: write the date on which oral arguments were held before the
IAC.
held because the appeal was withdrawn, dismissed, or otherwise terminated
before oral arguments were necessary. If there are multiple dates listed in which
oral arguments were heard, list the latest date on record.
i) Decision/Disposition: write the date on which the IAC issued a final decision
for the appeal OR the date on which the appeal was dismissed. Do not include
the dates on which the court decided motions or preliminary issues.
5. Type of Conviction (use codes): Using the attached list of crime codes, indicate
the category that accurately captures the most severe crime for which the defendant
was convicted. There are five primary conviction categories. The first digit reflects the
general category of the crime and the second digit indicates a more detailed subcategory. For purposes of determining the severity of the crime, the general, but not
definitive, rule is that the lower the first digit number, the more severe the offense.

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 4

October 21, 2009

Attempted offenses are included within each crime type (i.e., it is implied that, for
example, conviction/charge code 20 includes attempted burglary). If Conviction code
sure to explain the offense on the back of the
page.
Indicate the level of severity for the offense by marking one of the following boxes:
Capital Felony, Non-Capital Felony, or Misdemeanor. Be sure to indicate the
severity of the offense even if the conviction offense cannot be identified.
A felony should be classified as a capital felony only if the defendant has been
sentenced to death.
Note: Do not assume the level of severity of an offense since, with limited
exceptions, these offenses may be classified as a felony or a misdemeanor
depending upon state statute. Look to the statement of facts or the opinion to
see if either document specifies the conviction type and/or the level of severity
of the offense.
6. Total # of issues presented in
initial brief: Indicate the total
number of issues raised on appeal by the appellant in the
. We
are only interested in issues that were actually briefed. This information should
therefore be obtained from the briefs only; do not tally the number of errors assigned by
the appellant in the notice of appeal or other preliminary documents.
6a thru 6f: Issue on appeal (use codes): Using the attached list of issue
codes, indicate the category that accurately captures the legal issue presented in the
here are eight primary categories for issue on appeal. The first
digit reflects the general category of the issue and the second digit indicates a more
detailed sub-category. If Issue code 9
her trial court error ) is used, be sure to
explain the error on the back of the page. In addition, please note the type of error on
These codes
in
will be the same codes used for catego
Question 9, but note that the issues raised in the briefs may or may not be the same
issues that are addressed by the court in the opinion.
The total number of issues entered must match the number coded for Question
6(a) thru 6(f), unless the appellant raises more than six issues on appeal. For this
question, we are interested only in the first six issues raised (listed in the order they
only the first
six issues
Question 6 and list
3 codes for Questions 6a, 6b, and 6c. If there are 8 issues on
8
Question 6 but list only the first 6 codes for Questions 6a through 6f.
7. Appellate court disposition: Check the manner in which the appeal was resolved
at the IAC. While it is possible that only one option will apply to a case, the options
listed are not necessarily mutually exclusive; please check all options that apply.
Please be thorough and precise when coding the dispositions. If the appeal is still
pending, skip to Question 10 and check the box marked Pending.
a. Review/transfer not granted or dismissed due to:

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 5

October 21, 2009

Appeal improvidently granted the appeal was initially accepted by the
court, but it was later determined that the appeal should have been denied for
some reason. Typically this code will be used for appellate courts with
discretionary (or by permission) jurisdiction over criminal appeals.
Lack of jurisdiction

the appeal was dismissed because it was filed in the

matter or there is a lack of jurisdiction because the trial court has issues
pending and thus still has jurisdiction over the case.
Denied (discretionary review) the case is a by permission appeal
(meaning that the court has discretionary jurisdiction over the appeal), and
the court denies review.
Procedural error a procedural error prevents IAC review of the issues
raised. For example, the appellant missed the deadline for filing a notice of
appeal. This option also includes appeals that are extinguished by the filing
of a timely post-verdict motion in the trial court.
No valid issue on appeal the notice of appeal did not allege a reviewable
error. Trial court decisions may only be appealed if the errors were
prejudicial, were preserved during trial, and were identified and explained in
an appellate brief. If a notice of appeal fails to allege that the error was
prejudicial, or if the errors alleged were not objected to during trial, then the
thus there are
questions

Unknown the appeal was not accepted, but the reason underlying the
rejection is not apparent.
b. Appeal withdrawn before decision:
By appellant
opinion.

the appellant withdrew the appeal before the IAC issued an

Transfer/certified to COLR of Last Resort before review by the IAC. For example, this may occur when a
COLR transfers a case from the IAC due to the potential policy implications of
errors related to those raised by the current appeal.
Note: the transfer or certification of a case to the COLR is a disposition
for the case, but it does not resolve the issues on appeal. As such, if
this disposition is chosen there will not be an opinion written in the
case, and
8.
Unknown the appeal was clearly withdrawn and is no longer pending, but
the withdrawing party is unknown.
c. Affirmed in whole: the IAC affirmed the entire trial court decision or
judgment.
Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 6

October 21, 2009

d. Reversed in whole: the IAC reversed the entire trial court decision or
judgment. Include here any judgments that are
in whole Be sure to
explain the effect of the reversal in the space below.
e. Reversed in part: the IAC reversed only part(s) of the trial court decision or
judgment
here any judgments that are
in part Be sure to explain the effect of
the reversal in the space below.
f. Remanded: the court sent the case back to the lower court for additional
proceedings. Check this even if the lower court will revisit only some of the
issues. Be sure to explain the effect of the remand in the space below. Do
reasons for remanding the case; include only the effect of
the remand, (e.g., Remand to the trial court for a new trial, in light of the improper
jury verdict forms.) If the court reversed the trial court decision in whole or in part
and remanded the case, check both (f) remanded and (d) or (e).
g. Conviction/sentence modified: This option is applicable if the IAC modified
th
issue without remanding the case. A
separate issue may be remanded and coded as such. Be sure to explain the
effect of the modification, below
reasons for
modification here; include only the effect of the modification, (e.g., Sentence
reduced from 2.5 years to 1.5 years). If the court reversed the trial court decision
in whole or in part and modified the conviction or sentence, check both (g)
modified and (d) or (e).
8. Type of Decision:
An opinion on the
merits is one in which the court has considered the arguments of the parties, either
following oral arguments or based on a review of the briefs only. If the court does not
consider the merits of the appeal (i.e., there is no resolution of the issues in the case),
oO
(Question 8) and DO NOT code any issues in Question 9.
Full Opinion: The appellate court produces an expansive discussion and
elaboration of the merits of the case or the defect or procedural error. The
elaboration may include statements of fact, issues
Memorandum: The appellate court produces a limited discussion of the merits of
the case or the procedural determination. The discussion will only include some

Summary/Dispositional Order: The appellate court produces a document that
has no discussion of the facts or merits of the case, or no discussion of the

Other Opinion: if the type of decision is not listed above. Use this sparingly.
No Opinion: The appellate court did not issue an opinion on the merits of the
case.
Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 7

October 21, 2009

9. Total # of issues addressed by Opinion: Indicate the total number of issues
addressed by the court in the dispositive opinion.
checkbox if the appeal is currently awaiting the release of the final opinion. If the
opinion is released at a later date, please return to this question to complete the coding.
1. Issue Addressed: Using the attached list of issue codes, indicate the
category that accurately captures the legal issue addressed by the court.
There are eight
reflects the general category of the issue and the second digit indicates a
more detailed sub-category. If Issue code 9
be sure to explain the error on the back of the page. In addition, please note
the type of error on the back of the page wheneve
codes are used. These issues may or may not be the same issues presented
6.
The total number of issues entered must match the number coded for
Question 9(a) thru 9(f), unless the opinion addresses more than six issues on
appeal. For this question, we are interested only in the first six issues raised
(listed in the order they appear in the opinion). If the opinion addresses more
than six issues, code only the first six issues. For example, if there are 3
9 and list 3 codes for Questions 9a(1),
9 but
9b(1), and 9c(1)
list only the first 6 codes for Questions 9a through 9f.
2. Resolution: Enter the appropriate resolution using the attached list of five
codes for each of the issues
.
resolution only for opinions that are dispositional in nature. If Resolution code
the merits ) is used, be sure to explain the
other resolution on the back of the page.
10. Present status of appeal: Indicate whether the appeal has been closed (for any
reason) or is still pending. An appeal is considered closed only if the court has issued a
final order or opinion dismissing or resolving the appeal. This includes appeals that are
dismissed at the request of either party. If the appeal is STILL PENDING, skip to
Question 13. If pending in a COLR, the case should be considered closed at the IAC.
11. Request to reconsider/rehear:
a. If applicable, write the first date on which either party requested that the IAC
skip to Question 12. Do not answer this question if the IAC has not yet issued
a decision for this case or if the deadline to move for reconsideration or
rehearing has not yet expired (a motion could still be filed).
b. Reconsideration/rehearing granted: if you recorded a date for part a,
indicate whether the IAC granted the request to rehear or reconsider the
appeal. If a decision was made, but you are unsure of the results, mark the
no request for
reconsideration/rehearing was made, do not check either box. If the court

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 8

October 21, 2009

modified its original judgment after rehearing or reconsideration, please note
the effect of the modification on the back of this coding form.
12. Appealed to State Court of Last Resort:
a. Appealed COLR: If the IAC has issued a decision, indicate whether either
party has filed an appeal with the state court of last resort (COLR). If you
cannot determine this, mark
If the appeal was transferred to the COLR
noted in 7b and do not complete this section.
b. Date: Write the date on which the petition or notice of appeal was filed. Do
not include interlocutory appeals. If no further appeal has been filed, skip to
Question 13. If the date is unknown, mark
c. Petition granted?: Indicate whether the COLR granted the petition for
appeal or certiorari. If you cannot determine this, mark
d. Date: Write the date on which the petition was granted or denied. If the date
is unknown, mark
13. Defendant
ounsel: Write the name, address, and telephone number of the
defendant
defendant has more than one attorney
simultaneously, write the name and contact information that appears first in the IAC
record. If the defendant changed counsel during the IAC appeal, write the name and
contact information of the most recent attorney. Please check if the defendant was
assigned either a public defender or court appointed counsel. If the defendant does not
defendant
contact information. An attorney representing him or herself is NOT considered pro se
(in this situation, write the name and contact information of the defendant).
14. State s counsel: Write the nam
counsel for the IAC appeal. If the state has more than one attorney simultaneously,
write the name and contact information of the lead counsel or counsel of record.

Please use the back of this form to state additional comments about this case,
including any deviations from typical appeal processing: On the back of the coding
form, please list any additional information that might be useful in understanding the
appeal, particularly any unique processing events.
Please print your initials and date each coding form as it is
completed.

Criminal Appeals Study Coding Instructions (IAC)

Page 9

October 21, 2009

Appendix H: Conviction Codes
The type of conviction (Question 5) will be identified by a two-digit code. The first digit indicates the general category of
crime (i.e., person, property, drug, or public order) and the second digit indicates the more detailed offense. Attempted
offenses are included within each crime type (i.e., it is implied that, for example, conviction code 20 includes attempted
burglary). Please note that, with limited exceptions, these offenses may be classified as a felony or a misdemeanor
depending upon state statute.
Person Offenses: 10-level codes refer to offenses against a person defined by the
Program as those offenses involving force or the threat of force.
10
11

Murder
Sex offenses

Robbery

Assault

Other person offense

Homicide, non-negligent manslaughter, voluntary homicide
Forcible intercourse, sodomy, penetration with a foreign object, carnal knowledge of
minor, internet sex crimes, pornography, nonviolent or non-forcible sexual assault
Unlawful taking of anything of value by force or threat of force; armed, unarmed, and
aggravated robbery, car-jacking, armed burglary, armed mugging
Aggravated assault, aggravated battery, attempted murder, assault with a deadly
weapon, felony assault or battery on a law enforcement officer, simple assault, and
other felony or misdemeanor assaults
Vehicular manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, negligent or reckless homicide,
kidnapping unlawful imprisonment, child or spouse abuse, cruelty to a child, reckless
endangerment, hit-and-run with bodily injury, intimidation, and extortion

Property Offenses: 20Program as the taking of money or property, or the damage of property, without the use or threat of force against the
victims.
20

Burglary

Larceny/theft

Motor vehicle theft

Fraud/Forgery

Any type of entry into a residence, industry, or business with or without the use of force
with the intent to commit a felony or theft
Unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession or
constructive possession of another. Grand or petty theft or larceny, shoplifting, or the
stealing of any property or article that is not taken by force and violence or by fraud
such as thefts of bicycles, motor vehicle parts and accessories
Auto theft, conversion of an automobile, receiving and transferring an automobile,
unauthorized use of a vehicle, possession of a stolen vehicle, larceny or taking of an
automobile

names of such cards or any other documents with fraudulent intent, uttering a forged
instrument, counterfeiting, possession and passing of worthless checks or money
orders, possession of false documents or identification, embezzlement, obtaining
money by false pretenses, credit card fraud, welfare fraud, Medicare fraud, insurance
claim fraud, fraud, swindling, stealing a thing of value by deceit, and larceny by check
Other property offense Receiving or buying stolen property, arson, reckless burning, damage to property,
criminal mischief, vandalism, criminal trespassing, possession of burglary tools, and
unlawful entry for which the interest is unknown

Conviction Codes (continued)

Drug Offenses: 30the
violation of laws prohibiting the production, distribution, and/or use of certain controlled substances and the equipment
or devices utilized in their preparation and/or use.
30

Drug trafficking

Other drug offenses

Trafficking, sales, distribution, possession with intent to distribute or sell,
manufacturing, and smuggling of controlled substance
Possession of controlled substances, prescription violations, possession of drug
paraphernalia, and other drug law violations

Public Order Offenses: 40-level codes refer to public order offenses akin to the public nuisance defined by
Dictionary as any unreasonable interference with rights common to all members of community in general and
encompasses public health, safety, peace, morals, or convenience.
40

Weapons

Driving-related

42
42

Probation/parole
Other public order

Other Offense:
above.
50

Other criminal offense

The unlawful sale, distribution, manufacture, alteration, transportation, possession or
use of a deadly weapon or accessory
Driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, driving with a suspended or revoked
license, and any other felony in the motor vehicle code
Technical violations of conditions of parole or probation
Flight/escape, prison contraband, habitual offender, obstruction of justice, rioting, libel,
slander, treason, perjury, prostitution, pandering, bribery, disturbing the peace,
indecent exposure and tax law violations

Appendix I: Issues on Appeal
Arrest/Charge
10

Indictment defects

Guilty plea challenges

Other arrest/charge

Includes improper/defective indictment, lack of specificity or amendments to
charging documents
Includes issues of informed consent, voluntariness or coercion of the plea,
competence, factual basis, knowing and voluntary waiver of right to trial and
jury and counsel etc.
Other issues involving arrest or charge such as police impropriety

Pretrial Management
20

Trial court jurisdiction/venue

Trial court lacked jurisdiction, problems with the location of the prosecution

Suppression issues

Competency issues

Includes statements, identification issues, coerced confessions, illegal search
and seizure, and the denial of other motions in limine

Language issues

Joinder/sever

Other pretrial management

Trial Management

proceedings and assist in the defense or mental competency at the time of the
offense
Includes issues relating to limited English proficiency or hearing impairment that
in the defense
Issues involving multiple convictions arising out of the same fact patterns, lesser
included offenses, or multiple defendants
Includes other pretrial management issues such as denial of motion for
continuance, denial of motion for discovery or issues relating to preliminary
hearings

Judicial Bias

Disqualification of judge on basis of bias or conflict of interest

Prosecutor Misconduct

Ineffective counsel

Jury management

Court Interpreter

Includes perjured testimony, inappropriate comments, withholding exculpatory
evidence, or improper jury argument
Includes competency of representation issues such as failure to investigate,
failure to object, and failure to appeal; denial of request to proceed pro se/pro
per; denial of counsel of choice; denial of counsel; unintelligent waiver of
counsel; and multiple conflicting representation of defendants
Includes peremptory challenges, exclusion on the basis of race (Batson
challenge), race neutral selection criteria (includes grand and petit jury
selection), adverse pretrial publicity, or juror outside discussion or research (i.e.
internet research or texting)
Issues involving providing or qualifications of court interpreter

Other trial management

Issues involving other procedural or discretionary rulings

Evidence
40

Character testimony

Opinion evidence

Admission or exclusion of testimony as to the character of a witness, defendant
or victim such as reputation for truthfulness or untruthfulness such as prior bad
acts or convictions
Admission or exclusion of opinion evidence by expert witness or lay witness

Issues on Appeal (continued)
42

Relevancy/prejudicial

Exculpatory/mitigating
Evidence

Sufficiency of Evidence

New Evidence

Other evidence

Admission or exclusion of evidence based on a determination of the probative
value in relation to the prejudicial effect
Admission or exclusion of evidence that may justify or excuse an accused
defendant's actions or which may tend to show the defendant is not guilty or had
no criminal intent

Has the prosecution met the burden of proving facts sufficient to satisfy each
element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt
New evidence, unavailable at the time of the conviction, was introduced or
technology has advanced permitting the review of new evidence (e.g., DNA
evidence).
Admission or exclusion of evidence including but not limited to issues involving
hearsay, public records, authentication of documents, etc.

Substantive Law
50

Statutory interpretation

Defense

Jury Instructions

Other substantive law

Issues involving plain meaning, legislative intent, statutory construction,
definitions
Includes disallowed proffer of a defense or refusal to allow alternative theory of
defense, or affirmative defense
Instructional errors regarding substantive elements of the offense or lesser
included offenses
Other substantive law not covered by these codes

Constitutional Issues
60

Statute Unconstitutional

Statute under which the conviction was obtained is unconstitutional

Speedy Trial

Issues related to delay in trial, length of delay, reason for delay

Double Jeopardy

Confrontation/
Cross examination

Issues related to defendant being put on trial more than once for the same
offense
examine witnesses

Other Constitutional

Sentencing Issues

Other constitutional challenge not otherwise addressed by these codes (if
underlying issue is already addressed by another code do not use this code i.e.
conviction unconstitutional because of insufficient evidence or indictment
defects)

Sentencing hearing

Aggravating/mitigating factors Exclusion or admission of aggravating or mitigating factors that might affect the
severity of the sentence
Excessive/inconsistent
Excessive sentence or bail, sentence inconsistent with plea bargain or
conviction, consecutive/concurrent sentences, mandatory minimums, time
served
Probation revocation hearings Issues related to revocation of a prior sentence for probation violations

Other sentencing

Problems with sentencing hearing or presentence report

Denial of allocution
own behalf), restitution

the court on his

Issues on Appeal (continued)
Post Trial
80

Set Aside Verdict

Issues related to setting aside the jur

File Type	application/pdf
File Modified	2011-08-12
File Created	2009-11-23