A Comparative Analysis of the Right to Appeal

Peter D. Marshall, New York University

Abstract

This article focuses on the origins and contemporary understandings of the right to appeal against conviction and sentence. Adopting a comparative approach, the article first argues that, despite very different historical foundations and institutional structures, the past century has seen considerable convergence in how criminal appeals are conceptualized in common law and civil law jurisdictions. A number of reasons for this convergence are identified. The article’s focus then turns to the substance of the right, particularly the scope of review. It is argued that, although certain differences remain, a shared understanding of the right’s essential features is emerging. States, it is submitted, must provide criminal defendants with the opportunity to access a fair appellate process that permits adequate and effective review of conviction and sentence.