[Pfesser]

Lower Appeals Courts, for the most part, only have the authority to review a case if there was an "error of law". Appeals courts do not hear cases involving "errors of fact". They do not hear new evidence or witnesses. They only hear arguments from lawyers regarding whether due process was followed. That is why governors in state cases or the President in federal cases have the authority to grant pardons and reprieves. They may decide if errors of fact have occurred.

[blackdog]

Would not due process in this and other cases be defined by the police bringing to discovery all the relevant police reports in any case? Is the prosecution to function by bringing forth only those reports which implicate a suspect, or are they required to also provide reports which may offer innocence?

IMHO I would also like prosecutors to be prohibited from running for political office. Justice should be just that. Not what cases a prosecutor wants to feather his/her resume with for political posturing.