Review of Convictions after Jury Trials: The New French Jury Court of Appeal

Abstract

The French have recently created a jury court of appeal (cour d'assises d'appel) for appeals from the jury trial court (cour d'assises) which latter, transplanted from the British after the Revolution, judges serious criminal cases. A convicted accused has now a right to a new trial before another jury court. This article looks at why and how this new court came to be added to the French criminal justice system. It notes that that system, essentially operated by legal professionals (judges and prosecutors), has now opted for an increased role for lay persons in the disposition of serious criminal cases. It also notes that despite the second chance offered those convicted by the cour d'assises there has so far been a low level of appeals (about 10 per cent of convictions), partly explicable perhaps by a rate of re-conviction no lower than in the cour d'assises - 95 per cent.

The article then considers by way of contrast how the United Kingdom and Australia have dealt with appeals from convictions by juries, noting that convictions by the well entrenched and highly regarded criminal juries in those jurisdictions may be overridden by courts of criminal appeal on very broad criteria (unsafe conviction, miscarriage of justice) which ultimately allow a subjective judicial reaction to the guilt of the accused. It may be seen as ironic that the French have extended the use of the jury in giving an accused a second chance while the British and Australians have allowed a degree of judicial second guessing over jury verdicts. The article also looks at alternative revision procedures for alleged miscarriages of justice in serious criminal cases in France, the United Kingdom and Australia.

Keywords: French criminal procedures, New jury court of appeal, Appeal as of right to second jury court, Contrast with UK and Australian Courts of Criminal Appeal

JEL Classification: K14, K33, K40