Appellate Litigation, Criminal Appeals, Title IX Appeals

Minnesota Court of Appeals

Minnesota Supreme Court

Postconviction Relief

Petitions for Review

Title IX Appeals

Federal Appeals

Were you or someone you know wrongly convicted of a crime?

Wilson & Clas has the appellate experience necessary to thoroughly review criminal cases for individuals convicted of any crime in Minnesota, the expertise to appeal effectively, and the skillset to win. Wilson & Clas has proven success in achieving reversals (“wins”) at the appellate level in Minnesota. The firm’s attorneys have handled numerous State and Federal appeals to the Minnesota Court of Appeals, the Minnesota Supreme Court, and the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in first-degree murder, felony assault, criminal sexual conduct, expungement, and harassment restraining order cases, and more.

If you need a capable Minnesota criminal appeals attorney, contact the firm today.

Appeals have strict timelines—sometimes as short as 30 days from the date an individual’s case ends. It is absolutely imperative to move efficiently when handling appeals. Most timelines are jurisdictional deadlines, meaning that if the timelines are ignored, the procedural rules might forbid the appellate courts from hearing the case at all.

Unlike district courts, which are divided by county (Hennepin County District Court, Wright County District Court, Ramsey County District Court, etc.), there is only one Minnesota Court of Appeals, and there is only one Supreme Court of Minnesota. Generally speaking, a conviction entered in district court must first be appealed to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. If that appeal is unsuccessful, the individual may petition for a hearing before the Supreme Court of Minnesota. In some rare cases—such as following an individual’s conviction for first-degree murder—the Appellant is permitted to pursue an immediate appeal directly to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

Federal Courts have their own appellate structure, divided by Circuits. Minnesota falls within the Eighth Circuit and appeals from the federal district courts are heard by three-judge panels at the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

The firm also handles Title IX appeals, which differ dramatically from state and federal criminal appeals. Colleges and universities adopt their own internal processes for direct Title IX appeals; however, if those direct appeals are unsuccessful, students wrongly found “responsible” for Title IX violations may seek to have their cases removed from the college or university process and formally heard by judges.

Wilson & Clas has significant experience in handling criminal appeals and quasi-criminal appeals (such as Title IX appeals).

Timelines to File a Appeal, and the Grounds to Grant Relief

As mentioned, there are strict timelines associated with filing an appeal and, generally speaking, the timelines are jurisdictional. This means that if an appeal is not filed within the necessary timeframes, the appellate courts may—legally speaking—lose the power to hear the case.

Appeals to the Minnesota Court of Appeals

The Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Rules of Appellate Procedure govern appeals in misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor, and felony cases, unless the individual was convicted of first-degree murder. Appeals in first-degree murder cases are heard directly by the Minnesota Supreme Court and bypass review by the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

With felony and gross misdemeanor appeals, the defendant must file their notice of appeal within 90 days after final judgment or entry of the order to be appealed. Other charges that were joined for prosecution with the felony or gross misdemeanor may be included in the appeal. As long as one of the charges against the defendant was for a felony or gross misdemeanor, the 90-day deadline applies.

With misdemeanor appeals, the defendant must file their notice of appeal within 30 days after final judgment or entry of the order to be appealed.

With postconviction appeals, the defendant must file their notice of appeal within 60 days after entry of the district court’s order denying postconviction relief.

Appeals to the Minnesota Supreme Court

Criminal defendants only have a right to have their case heard by the Minnesota Supreme Court in first-degree murder cases. In all other criminal cases, there is no right to have a case heard by the Minnesota Supreme Court. The Minnesota Rule of Criminal Procedure require those other defendants to petition for review by the Court, and the Court must choose to hear the case.

In first-degree murder cases, the defendant must file their notice of appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court within 90 days after the district court enters the final judgment of conviction. This means both the verdict of guilty (by the court or by a jury), and imposition of sentence.

In postconviction proceedings following a first-degree murder conviction, the defendant must file their notice of appeal within 60 days after the district court enters the adverse final order.

In appeals to the Minnesota Supreme Court from the Minnesota Court of Appeals, the party appealing must serve and file a petition for review within 30 days after the Court of Appeals issues an adverse opinion.

Petitions for Review by the Minnesota Supreme Court

The Minnesota Supreme Court agrees to hear only a fraction of the cases that appellants and petitioners request it to review. Because of this, it is critical to compile as strong a Petition for Review as possible. You generally only have one chance to convince the Supreme Court to hear your case. The attorneys at Wilson & Clas are among the few attorneys in Minnesota to have experience successfully petitioning the Supreme Court to accept review of an appeal. (The firm also has experience handling direct appeals to the Minnesota Supreme Court, as permitted in cases where an individual was convicted of first-degree murder).

The Minnesota Supreme Court’s “discretionary review” is guided by the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure, which outlines the factors the Supreme Court should consider in deciding to hear criminal appeals:

• Whether the decision by the Court of Appeals presents an important question on which the Supreme Court should rule;

• Whether the Court of Appeals ruled on the constitutionality of a Minnesota (or other) statute;

• Whether the Court of Appeals decided a question in direct conflict with an applicable precedent of a Minnesota appellate court, including the Supreme Court;

• Whether the lower courts (district courts, trial courts, or court of appeals), have so far departed from the accepted and usual course of justice that the Supreme Court should exercise its supervisory powers; or

• Whether a decision issued by the Minnesota Supreme Court will help to develop, clarify, or harmonize the law; and

  • The case calls for the application of a new principle or policy;

  • The resolution of the question has possible statewide impact; or

  • The question will likely recur unless resolved by the Supreme Court through reviewing the case.

Remedies on Appeal

Appellate courts in Minnesota are supposed to be error-correcting courts. Unlike when dealing with a jury (or a district court judge conducting a bench trial), the issue on appeal is often not the guilt or innocence of the individual appealing. Appellate courts do not issue opinions as to guilt or innocence; rather, generally speaking, they either “affirm” the district court, “reverse” the district court, or “reverse and remand” the district court.

The concern on appeal is primarily the law.

If the appellate court affirms the district court’s judgment, it must direct execution of the decision pronounced by the district court (or as modified by the appellate court). If it reverses the judgment, it must direct the district court to hold a new trial, vacate the defendant’s conviction and enter a judgment of acquittal, or reduce the conviction to a lesser included offense or to an offense of a lesser degree, as the specific facts of the case require. If the appellate court orders the district court to reduce the conviction, it must remand the case for re-sentencing under the reduced conviction.