Appellate courts review the lower courts' decisions to help determine if the courts applied the law accordingly. At the appellate level, the courts always check the findings and evidence submitted by the lower courts. They later determine if the proof provided was sufficient to support the lower courts' ruling. If they find that the findings were not enough for the case, the appellate court remands the case back to the trial courts.
The cases that go to the appellate courts are family law cases, probate cases, juvenile, felony, and civil cases. In each of these courts, three judges are sitting in a panel, and they have to decide appeals from the trial courts, which look like unfair trials. They are responsible for making decisions. They also can agree with the trial court's verdict, which means that there is no need for the case to be taken back to the court, but rather, they agree with the judgment. The appellate case review issues sometimes tend to challenge the courts' legal process, which affects some functions of the trial courts. The appellate court might reverse a ruling because it found errors made by the jury even if the trial court had reached the correct verdict. This is a significant challenge for the courts' legal process and may weaken the trial courts' rulings whenever the appellants feel that the case was maybe taken to the appellate courts.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The appellate court does not listen to the cases' facts, but instead, they focus on the law's questions. This affects the courts' legal processes because the trial courts work with the fact that prosecutors gather to make the case strong enough. The appellate court sometimes reverses the decision of the trial court and orders for a new trial. This can challenge the court process because now the jury in the trial court will need another sitting and hearing to give a recent verdict while the prosecutors will need to gather other evidence that can be used in the trial courts.
Appellate case reviews can be misused, creating arguments that are not credible. If the appellant feels they are about to lose their case in the trial court, they go to the appellate court. Here they create arguments that are not credible, as they insist that they were not given a fair hearing and that the judges wrongly ordered the jury on a different meaning of the law. This affects the courts' legal processes most of the time as the appellate courts may reverse the ruling or remand the case to the trial court. This hinders justice to be given in the trial courts. While the trial courts give lawyers a chance to present the legal arguments and their evidence to persuade the jury, the appellate courts only argue policy and legal issues before the judge. Sometimes they are given a chance to introduce new evidence with permission from the bench of judges hearing the appeal. These acts are always seen as a way of challenging the legal process in the trial courts.
The appellate case review can be used to render as trial null and void. This is evident in the criminal cases where the courts can ask the look at the trial proceedings and determine an error that affected the trial's outcome. The judge gave the appellant an unfair sentence. This can cause the case to be remanded back to the trial court seeking additional proceedings or seek a new trial. Sometimes the appellant courts can send the topic to the Supreme Court if they feel that the practice was unfair.
