How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Maverick Your Own Question
Maverick, Lawyer
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 6423
Experience:  20 years experience
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
Maverick is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I have an appeal pending in the District of Columbia Court

Customer Question

I have an appeal pending in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. I'm appealing the denial of a motion. The motion was denied without a hearing I believe in error. I want to supplement the record on appeal with correspondence I would have introduced at the hearing. I plan to file a motion under Rule 27(b)(1)(c). The U.S. Attorney's office says they will oppose the motion. What does the case lay say about this?
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  Maverick replied 1 year ago.

Welcome! My name is Maverick. Please give me a few minutes to analyze and/or research your inquiry and I will be back.

Expert:  Maverick replied 1 year ago.

Rule 27(b)(1)(c) states that you can file a motion with the appeals court to get permission to supplement the record. Without knowing more as to why the US Attorney is opposing this, it is hard to know which case law to look at.

If I had to venture a guess as to the reason for the opposition, it would be because you may have had a duty to file a motion for new trial in the trial court and attach the correspondence to that motion so that the trial court would have had a chance to correct its error and so that your correspondence would have become part of the trial court record before the case went to appeal.

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
In the phone conversation I had the US attorney stated that the opposition was simply based on the fact that the correspondence wasn't seen by the trial judge. FYI I plead guilty in the trial court and the motion that was denied was a motion to withdraw a guilty plea. I have already researched the standard the court should apply to determine whether or not such a motion should be denied without a hearing. I do not believe that standard was met. For purposes of this conversation I want you to assume that I am correct. So back to my original question. Is there precedent in the DCCA, the Federal D.C. Circuit or the Supreme Court, not necessarily in that order, for when the record should be allowed to be supplemented? Or in other words is there precedent regarding supplementing the record with material that was not viewed by the trial court?
Expert:  Maverick replied 1 year ago.

Yes, it is as I had suspected. The correspondence was not see by the trial court. In order to make that happen one usually has to file a motion for new trial and include that correspondence and then if the trial judge denies the MFNT, then you can select the MFNT and its attachments to be part of the record on appeal.

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Wasn't my motion to withdraw my guilty plea is essence a motion for a new trial? I'm sorry but I asked a very specific question and your answers are vague. OK so you want $100 to actually answer the question. Before I would consider doing that I need for you to give me a reason to believe you will be able to come back with something that will actually help me "generally". If you are unable to do that with your next response I will have to give you a negative rating and decide whether or not to try and get another JustAnswer opinion or do the research myself.