Are a Judge's Statements at Sentencing Grounds for Appeal

My question involves criminal law for the state of:Pennsylvania

About a month ago a friend of mine mine was recently found guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
She was sentenced earlier this week to 2 to 6 years and 5 years parole.
Going back to the trial, which lasted 8 days. It seemed from the very beginning that she would continuously overrule her attorney. Several other things seemed odd. Myself as well as 2 others had been subpoenaed to testify for the defense. Each of us had witnessed and had been told things that would not be good for the prosecution. The judge did not let us testify. There was also physical evidence which would have really hurt the prosecution. That was not allowed to be shown. Myself as well as others also noticed how the testimony from the prosecution witnesses kept continually changing.
Like I said yesterday she was sentenced to 2 to 6 years and 5 years probation. The judge also made some very outrageous and degrading remarks.
I told her to tell her to tell her attorney she wants to appeal. Was I correct in saying that?

You were not necessarily correct nor not necessarily incorrect. Her attorney will be the one who best knows whether or not an appeal is appropriate.

I wanted to check. She saw her attorney yesterday and informed him that she wanted to appeal. He told her not to because the District Attorney and the Judge had told him if she did they would add 2 years to her sentence.

The judge didn't let you testify? Why? As long as proper procedure was followed (listed witness) and your testimony was pertinent, a judge would be out of line by refusing to allow a defense witness. That could be grounds for an appeal

as to the defense counsel continually being overruled; it depends why. Just because the attorney objected didn't mean the objection was valid but, as long as the attorney followed proper procedure, being overruled improperly could give rise to a basis for an appeal


there is nothing wrong with your friend telling her attorney she wants to explore the possibility of an appeal but unless your friend can undertake an appeal
without the help of an attorney, she will have to find an attorney that agrees there is a valid basis for an appeal. Appeals are not automatic and granted based simply on filing a request to appeal. There has to be a valid legal basis for the courts to grant an appeal.

Time is limited.

I wanted to check. She saw her attorney yesterday and informed him that she wanted to appeal. He told her not to because the District Attorney and the Judge had told him if she did they would add 2 years to her sentence.

Quote:

---

Quoting Harley2000

---

I wanted to check. She saw her attorney yesterday and informed him that she wanted to appeal. He told her not to because the District Attorney and the Judge had told him if she did they would add 2 years to her sentence.

---

Well, then she can appeal the sentence modification as being retaliatiatory for her exercising her rights.

Quote:

---

Quoting Harley2000

---

I wanted to check. She saw her attorney yesterday and informed him that she wanted to appeal. He told her not to because the District Attorney and the Judge had told him if she did they would add 2 years to her sentence.

---

Wow...that is odd. Are you sure that she did not accept a plea?

I did some searching and found her an attorney who has a lot of experience in regards to appeals. He stated what she had been told was totally unconstitutional. He is going to handle her appeal.

From the beginning the judge said no plea agreement.

Quote:

---

Quoting Harley2000

---

My question involves criminal law for the state of:Pennsylvania

I told her to tell her to tell her attorney she wants to appeal. Was I correct in saying that?

---

She can tell her attorney she wants an appeal if she likes. The issue is whether she has any good grounds for an appeal. In order to succeed in an appeal, she will have to show that the judge made errors of law in the case. She cannot win an appeal because she (or you) simply disagree with how the jury decided the case. The things you have raised fall into several categories.

First, there are some things during a trial that a client has the right to decide even though her attorney might advise her differently. If her choices on those matters turned out to be bad choices, there is no appeal for that. She doesn’t get a do over for her own poor decisions.

As for the judge barring you and the other two persons from testifying, that is likely an issue of law that could form the basis of an appeal if the judge’s decision was incorrect. I disagree with jk's statement that “As long as proper procedure was followed (listed witness) and your testimony was pertinent, a judge would be out of line by refusing to allow a defense witness.” There are a variety of reasons why a witness might be disqualified from testifying. The defense does not have an unfettered right to put up any witness it wishes. The rules of evidence constrain what may be presented. There is no way, however, just based on the information you provided to know if the judge’s decision was proper given the applicable rules of evidence.

The same problem occurs with the physical evidence. If the evidence sought to be used was inadmissible under the rules of evidence then the judge was correct to keep the evidence out. There is no information available in your post to determine if the judge made the right call to exclude that evidence. If an argument can be made the judge got it wrong then that would be an issue that may be worthy of appeal.

The judge’s remarks at sentencing that, in your opinion, were rude and outrageous are not something that are good grounds for any appeal.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

Appeals are not automatic and granted based simply on filing a request to appeal. There has to be a valid legal basis for the courts to grant an appeal.

---

The first level of appeal from a criminal conviction is automatic; so long as the appellant has indicted any proper grounds for appeal the appeals court will hear the case. This is not a situation like the state Supreme Court where you first need to get the court’s permission for the appeal.

Some of the evidence were text messages that were saved on her phone. The state police testified that according to phone records they weren't any text messages sent at the time stated. Although she still had them saved. If they are on her phone then they have to be on the phone records?
I'm amazed at how the judge can threaten her to appeal. Isn't that a constitutional right?

Her automatic appeal is what the judge was warning her about using.