A criminal conviction can be disheartening and even frightening. Once you’ve received a guilty verdict, what happens next? Is a conviction always set in stone? There may be some instances in which you can appeal your conviction. The Philadelphia attorneys at Rubin, Glickman, Steinberg & Gifford have a full understanding of the criminal appeals process. We know about the circumstances that may allow you to question your trial or conviction.
What if your trial attorney was in some way unprofessional or performed legal procedures incorrectly? This would be unfair to you; therefore, ineffective counsel is one of the reasons courts may allow defendants to request an appeal. According to Cornell University Law School’s Legal Information Institute, everyone in a criminal trial deserves to have sound, effective legal counsel.
In order to qualify for the appeal of a criminal conviction based on ineffective counsel, you would need to prove your lawyer failed to adequately represent you. It would not be enough simply to be unhappy with your conviction or to say that you thought you had a bad lawyer. Some possible examples of ineffective counsel might include the following:
- Your lawyer consistently arrived late to court appointments or filed paperwork late.
- He or she made important decisions on your case without talking to you first.
- Your attorney was never available to talk to you or always failed to return your calls.
- Unprofessional behavior, such as dressing flamboyantly or falling asleep in court, was common.
- Your lawyer frequently got legal procedures or terminology wrong.
If you believe you have a valid argument that your lawyer’s behavior or lack of knowledge unfairly impacted you in court, you might have a case for an appeal.
Understanding Ineffective Assistance
Ineffective assistance of counsel refers to situations where a defendant’s attorney fails to provide the level of representation required for a fair trial, leading to a miscarriage of justice. This can happen at various stages of the criminal justice process, including during the trial, appeal, or post-conviction proceedings.
Ineffective assistance can manifest in many ways, such as the counsel’s failure to investigate crucial evidence, failure to communicate effectively with the defendant, or failure to raise relevant defenses. When a defense counsel’s performance falls below the standard of reasonable professional assistance, it can significantly impact the outcome of a case.
The Strickland Test
The Strickland test, established by the Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington, is the benchmark for determining whether a defendant has received ineffective assistance of counsel. To establish ineffective assistance, a defendant must demonstrate two key points: first, that their defense counsel’s performance was deficient, and second, that this deficiency prejudiced the outcome of the case. In other words, the defendant must show that the trial lawyer’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that there is a reasonable probability that, but for the counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.
Seeking Help from a Criminal Appeals Lawyer
If you believe you have received ineffective assistance of counsel, it is crucial to seek help from a qualified criminal appeals lawyer. An experienced appeals lawyer can meticulously review your case, identify potential errors, and advise you on the best course of action. They can help you navigate the complex process of filing a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, ensuring that your rights are protected and that you have the best possible chance of a successful appeal.
When to Raise a Claim
A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel can be raised at various stages of the criminal process, though Pennsylvania courts generally require it to wait for collateral review. As a rule, a claim of trial counsel’s ineffectiveness raised for the first time on direct appeal will be dismissed without prejudice so it can be raised properly in a Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) petition, which is the standard vehicle for pursuing these claims once your direct appeal has concluded. To succeed, you generally must show that the underlying issue had merit, that counsel lacked a reasonable strategic basis for the action or inaction, and that the error prejudiced the outcome of your case. Understanding when and how to raise these claims is essential for ensuring that your rights are upheld throughout the criminal justice process.
Consequences of Counsel’s Failure
The consequences of a counsel’s failure to provide effective assistance can be severe. A defendant who receives ineffective assistance of counsel may be denied a fair trial, leading to a wrongful conviction or an excessive sentence. In some cases, the defendant may be entitled to a new trial or resentencing. In extreme cases, the defendant may be entitled to a complete dismissal of the charges.
It is essential for defendants to understand their rights and seek help from a qualified criminal appeals lawyer if they believe they have received ineffective assistance of counsel. Ensuring effective counsel is not just a legal requirement but a fundamental aspect of a fair and just criminal justice process.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between a direct appeal and a PCRA petition in Pennsylvania?
A direct appeal challenges legal errors that occurred during trial or sentencing based on the existing record, while a Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) petition is the proper vehicle for raising issues like ineffective assistance of counsel or newly discovered evidence.
How do I prove my lawyer was ineffective?
You generally must show that the issue your lawyer mishandled had merit, that your lawyer had no reasonable strategic basis for the action or inaction, and that the error actually prejudiced the outcome of your case.
Can I raise an ineffective assistance claim on my own direct appeal?
Generally no. Pennsylvania courts require these claims to wait for a PCRA petition after the direct appeal concludes, and a claim raised prematurely on direct appeal is typically dismissed without prejudice so it can be refiled properly.
Is being unhappy with the outcome enough to claim ineffective counsel?
No. You need specific, provable examples of deficient performance—such as missed deadlines, failure to investigate evidence, or failure to communicate—that actually affected your case’s outcome, not just dissatisfaction with the result.
Why do I need an appeals lawyer instead of my original trial attorney?
Your trial attorney generally cannot argue their own ineffectiveness, and an appeals lawyer brings a fresh, independent review of the record to identify errors your original counsel may have missed or caused.
Why Rubin, Glickman, Steinberg & Gifford P.C. Is Your Partner for Criminal Appeals
A criminal conviction can feel overwhelming, but it does not always have to be the final word. At Rubin, Glickman, Steinberg & Gifford P.C., we understand how critical effective legal representation is for a fair trial. With over 65 years of experience, we are committed to helping clients challenge convictions based on ineffective assistance of counsel and other legal errors.
Our team is recognized by the U.S. News & World Report and Pennsylvania Super Lawyers for ethical and strategic representation. If you believe your trial attorney’s performance affected the outcome of your case, we can review your case, guide you through the appeals process, and advocate for your rights. Contact us at (215) 822-7575 or through our contact form to discuss your appeal options.
Rubin, Glickman, Steinberg & Gifford P.C.
Pennsylvania Attorney's
August 25, 2026
