FAQ & Resources

A direct appeal begins with a notice of appeal, and in New York that notice must be filed within 30 days of sentencing. Miss that window and the right to a direct appeal can be lost, though in limited circumstances a court may grant permission to file late. Other avenues, such as a motion to vacate the judgment under CPL 440, are not tied to that same 30-day clock. The practical takeaway is simple: the sooner a record is reviewed, the more options remain open. If a sentence has just come down, the clock is already running.

Possibly. New York allows a defendant to ask the appellate court for permission to file a late notice of appeal in certain situations, for example where the failure to file on time was caused by improper conduct of a public servant or by an attorney, or where a person in custody could not reach counsel. That request has its own time limit and is not automatic. Separately, a CPL 440 motion to vacate the judgment carries no statute of limitations and can be brought even years later. If a deadline has passed, it is worth having the situation reviewed rather than assuming nothing can be done.

An appeal is a deliberate process, not a quick one. The transcript and record must be assembled, briefs are written and exchanged on a schedule the court sets, and the court then takes the case under consideration before issuing a decision. Depending on the court, the length of the record, and the complexity of the issues, that process commonly runs from several months to well over a year. The honest answer is that it takes as long as it takes to do right, and the timeline is driven by the record and the court's calendar more than by any single factor.

Appeals are won on the strength of the record and the law, not on sympathy, and most convictions are affirmed. That is the honest baseline. What changes the odds is whether a real, preserved legal error exists and whether it is argued precisely to the right court. When it is, appellate courts do reverse. People v. Williams is proof: a unanimous reversal and a new trial ordered in the Appellate Division, Fourth Department. The right question is not whether appeals usually win, but whether your record contains an error worth arguing, and that is answered by reading the record, not by a general statistic.

A direct appeal is built on errors that appear in the record of what happened below. Common grounds include evidence that should have been suppressed or excluded but was admitted, an incorrect ruling on a motion, an error in how the jury was instructed, prosecutorial misconduct, a legally insufficient verdict, and a sentence that is unlawful or unduly harsh. Not every mistake is reversible; the error generally has to have been preserved and to have mattered to the outcome. Identifying which errors clear that bar is the core of appellate work, and it starts with a close read of the transcript.

Yes, there is a path for new evidence, it just is not the direct appeal. A direct appeal is decided on the existing record, the transcript and exhibits from the trial court, so it is not the vehicle for new testimony or documents. New York provides a separate and powerful tool for exactly that situation: a CPL 440 motion, which is built to bring in facts the trial record never captured, such as newly discovered evidence, a witness who has come forward, or something that happened off the transcript. In many cases the two run together, the direct appeal on the record and the 440 motion on what lies beyond it. So if the problem with a conviction is evidence the jury never heard, the door is not closed; it is a different door.

Often, yes. A guilty plea does not automatically erase the right to appeal, though many plea agreements include a waiver of appeal that narrows what a court will consider. Even with a waiver, certain issues survive, such as the legality of the sentence, the voluntariness of the plea itself, and constitutional defects a waiver cannot reach. Whether your plea left a path open is a record question, and it is worth having that record read before assuming the door is closed.

In New York, most appeals from felony convictions go to the Appellate Division, which is organized into four Departments covering different parts of the state. The Department that hears a case depends on where the conviction occurred. From there, a further appeal to the Court of Appeals, New York's highest court, is possible in some cases but is not automatic and generally requires permission. Federal claims can, in the right circumstances, continue into the federal courts through a habeas corpus petition. Knowing which court will decide the case shapes how the brief is written, because each court has its own rules, tendencies, and body of precedent.

A direct appeal challenges what already appears in the trial record: the judge's rulings, evidence admitted or excluded, the jury charge, the sentence. It is argued to an appellate court on that record alone, with no new evidence. A CPL 440 motion is different. It raises problems that do not appear on the face of the record, for example a conflict, newly discovered evidence, or ineffective assistance that happened off the transcript. The two tracks run on different rules and different timelines, and in many cases both matter. Choosing the right one, or pursuing both in the right order, is where the work begins.

No. Unlike the direct appeal, a CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment carries no statute of limitations and may be brought at any time after judgment, even years later. That does not mean waiting is wise. Evidence grows stale, witnesses become harder to find, and some claims are stronger when raised promptly. It also is not a substitute for a direct appeal; a court can decline to hear a claim on a 440 motion that should have been raised on direct appeal. The absence of a deadline is an opening, not a reason to delay.

Federal habeas corpus is a route to ask a federal court to review a state conviction for violations of the United States Constitution, after the state courts have had their chance. It is narrow and procedurally demanding. For a state prisoner, there is generally a one-year deadline to file, which runs from the point the conviction becomes final on direct review, and that clock is paused while a properly filed state post-conviction motion is pending. Because the timing interacts with state appeals and 440 motions, the sequence matters enormously. A misstep on timing can close the federal door permanently, which is why habeas should be mapped out early, not as an afterthought.

Ineffective assistance of counsel is a constitutional claim that the lawyer's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that the deficiency affected the outcome. It is a demanding standard, not satisfied by second-guessing strategy or by a loss alone. When the deficiency appears in the record, it can be raised on direct appeal; when it depends on facts outside the record, such as what counsel failed to investigate, it is raised through a CPL 440 motion. Done right, it is one of the more powerful post-conviction claims available, capable of vacating a conviction and returning a case for a new trial.

Appellate fees depend on the size of the record, the complexity of the issues, and the court involved, so a flat number quoted sight unseen would be meaningless. What you should expect in return is concrete: a careful review of the record, a candid assessment of whether a viable issue exists, and, where one does, a brief built to persuade the specific court that will decide it. The first step is a review of the record and a straight answer about what can and cannot be argued. That conversation is where every sound appellate decision starts.

Yes. The practice handles criminal appeals across New York State, in all four Departments of the Appellate Division, as well as post-conviction motions under CPL 440 and federal habeas corpus petitions in the federal courts. Appellate work is done on the record and the briefs, which means geography is far less of a constraint than it is in trial practice. What matters is command of the record and the law that governs the court deciding the case.

Start with a conversation. We will want to know the basics: where and when the conviction occurred, what stage the case is at, and whether any appeal or motion has already been filed. From there, the first substantive step is obtaining and reviewing the record, because every honest assessment of an appeal depends on what the record actually says. Families often carry the weight of this process for someone inside, and a clear, early picture of the options is the most useful thing we can provide. Reach out and we will tell you plainly where things stand and what can be done.