Brownstone law focuses on post-conviction petitions and writs. We file post-conviction motions and writs of habeas corpus. Our Post-Conviction Relief Attorneys work to overturn your conviction or obtain a new trial for you. The Post-Conviction Relief Attorneys at Brownstone focus on delivering results that matter and criminal post-conviction motions and hearings across the country.
Connect with our post-conviction relief attorneys to file a motion for ineffective counsel, sentence reduction, or writ of habeas corpus.
Post-conviction litigation is a unique legal area that may be available to people who have been convicted of a crime after appeal rights have been exhausted. You may also qualify to withdraw your plea. Call our Post-Conviction Relief Attorneys at 1-888-233-8895. We file federal habeas corpus motions nationwide. Learn more about our federal habeas corpus writs.
Under the statute, a person convicted of a crime may file a Motion to Vacate Conviction and/or Sentence requesting a new trial or sentencing. There are various grounds to withdraw your plea or for Post-conviction grounds which include the following reasons:
If your motion is denied you may appeal to the United States Court of Appeals or States Courts of Appeals.
Our appellate law firm has experience in filing federal court post-conviction claims for inmates and defendants across the nation and in every federal appellate court. Whether you are an inmate in prison or a defendant that wants to vacate an old conviction, our post-conviction law firm can help. We represent clients seeking to
Motions for Habeas Corpus are normally filed after a person has exhausted all appellate remedies. Under the AEDPA (The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act) a defendant has one year and 90 days to file a writ of habeas corpus under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendants must exhaust all state remedies, including PDR claims, post-conviction relief motions, state court habeas claims, direct appeals to the circuit courts and highest court. Read more about Habeas Corpus Petitions.
Have you received a conviction that you’re eager to have overturned? Maybe your sentence is harsher than it should be? Whatever your situation may be, our legal team can help you get post-conviction relief. Brownstone Law’s Post-Conviction Relief Attorneys have helped thousands of clients file a post-conviction motion for relief, which can make a world of difference in your life, saving you thousands of dollars in legal fines and months (or years) of imprisonment. The firm also handles complex federal RICO or racketeering and conspiracy appeals in federal courts.
There are four common types of post-conviction relief. Chances are, you qualify for at least one of the following post-conviction motions:
A motion to reduce a sentence is fairly self-explanatory. If you have received a sentence that can be construed as illegal and/or is excessively harsh, then you can qualify for filing a motion to reduce the sentence. Brownstone has helped countless clients file motions to reduce a sentence.
This type of motion took the legal world by storm when DNA evidence came into play. Many high-profile criminal cases from years past had to be reviewed by the courts a second time because of the advent of DNA evidence. However, many other types of evidence can push you to file a motion for newly discovered evidence. Post conviction motions can be filed with new witnesses or new evidence.
As accomplished appeals lawyers, we understand that the strength of an appeal lies in discerning case law research, meticulous review of your trial, and compelling presentation before the courts. Our appeal lawyers are highly proficient law researchers, writers, and debaters. We hold a keen understanding of appellate laws and rules and are extremely adept at devising effective briefs and oral arguments.
Has your conviction been upheld upon appeal? There is no need to worry; it can be challenged through a post-conviction appeal for a writ of habeas corpus. The writ application is filed in instances where an accused has been denied his/her fundamental rights. It is usually granted on such grounds as ineffective assistance of counsel, any misconduct on the part of the prosecutor, or new evidence demonstrating innocence. If you successfully move for post-conviction relief, you can:
The following is a list of important points on post-conviction relief:
If you’ve been previously unsuccessful in obtaining relief from your conviction or sentence, post-conviction is your last effort to get that relief. Post-conviction relief is an important step that safeguards your constitutional rights. Additionally, the process is inherently complex and long-winding. That makes it very important to have an experienced and competent attorney representing you. Our post-conviction lawyers have an established track record of securing successful results for clients in post-conviction relief proceedings. Contact our post-conviction law firm at 888-233-8895.
The Supreme Court has expressly held that a defendant does not waive an ineffective assistance of counsel claim simply by entering a plea. Instead, because voluntariness of the plea depends on whether counsel’s advice was within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases, courts must continue to apply the familiar two-part test provided by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Arvelo v. Secretary, Florida Dept. of Corrections, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 1255 (11th Cir. June 10, 2015) (quoting Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 56–57, 106 S.Ct. 366, 369–70, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985)). In accordance with these well-established principles, Petitioner’s must submit that the post-conviction court should have granted him or her an evidentiary hearing as to each claim or given him the opportunity to amend any facially insufficient claim.
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must demonstrate that
Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687, 694. In the plea setting, a defendant must show that there was a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial. In the plea setting, a defendant must show that there was a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.
Lafler v. Cooper, 566 US __ (2013).
The Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel extends to the plea-bargaining phase. Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012). A defendant’s 6th amendment right to counsel, and right to effective counsel, was abrogated when trial counsel entered a plea agreement that was 5 years in excess of the maximum amount discussed by the prosecution. Defense counsel should have at least attempted to enter a plea that matched what the prosecution offered in the pre-trial proceeding. By entering a plea different from what was discussed with the defendant, and not advocating for the lowest plea agreement on the table, the defense counsel violated a defendant’s 6th amendment right to counsel, which includes the right to effective counsel. Read more about plea agreements in Lafler v. Cooper.
This Supreme Court case holds that a federal habeas court may excuse a procedural default on an ineffective-assistance of trial counsel claim when state law requires that claim to be raised in a collateral proceeding and the claim was not preserved properly, but the prisoner had only ineffective counsel during the initial-review collateral proceeding. Trevino v. Thaler, 569 U.S. 413, 428 (2013), holding that when, as here, a state’s procedural framework, by reason of its design and operation, makes it highly unlikely in a typical case that a defendant will have a meaningful opportunity to raise on direct appeal a claim that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance, the good cause exception recognized in Martinez v. Ryan applies. Read more about post conviction: Martinez v. Ryan (Supreme Court Post Conviction)
Have a question about an appeal, or want to discuss an appellate case?
