Although the Court had not previously used its statutory authority under section 25 to review a state criminal prosecution in the thirty-plus years between the Judiciary Act of 1789 and the writ of error in Cohens, the Supreme Court's practical extension of section 25 review in that case was almost entirely ignored as a matter of statutory interpretation.
The first feature of section 25 discussed below is that it provided for a writ of error in "any suit," not "any case" or "any suit or prosecution.
The writ of error allowed a superior court to remedy legal mistakes in lower law-court judgments.
Thus, what we term an appeal today resembles much more a writ of error than the word's original meaning.
1 Cranch) 212 (1803) (quashing writ of error
to General Court of Northwest Territory because Congress had not provided for Supreme Court review of decisions of that court); HASKINS & JOHNSON, supra note 33, at 621 (describing Clarke as "further evidence that all of the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction was the product of a constitutional grant as implemented by legislative action; absent one or the other of these vital elements, the Court refused to expound a theory of residual superintendence of federal courts as a foundation for its jurisdiction").
8) The sufficiency of the evidence presented at trial was not open to review on writ of error.
With the abolition of the writ of error and the disappearance of the other procedural barriers that made appellate review of factual issues impracticable, the issue was brought into focus.
By instructing that the writ of error should have the same effect in cases from the state courts and circuit courts, section 25 incorporated section 24's directive that "the Supreme Court shall not issue execution in causes that are removed from them by writs of error, but shall send a special mandate to the circuit court to award execution thereupon.
By providing a federal forum for trial, pretrial removal would provide much greater protection for federal interests than would appellate review via writ of error, particularly because such review was limited to questions of law and thus would have left much unreviewable.
In reversing, the court held that denial of post-conviction relief for judgments of conviction obtained by fraud or misrepresentation "would be repugnant to the due process clauses of the Constitutions of the United States and of the State of New York" and that "[t]he inherent power of a court to set aside its judgment which was procured by fraud and misrepresentation cannot be doubted" as it arises from the common law writ of error
coram nobis, (17) In addition, the court rejected the argument that executive clemency is a sufficient remedy for criminal defendants seeking post-conviction relief, noting that "[a] pardon proceeds not upon the theory of innocence, but implies guilt.
53) On 14 November 2007, the defense petitioned the AFCCA to issue a writ of error coram vobis, (54) claiming a Brady violation (55) by Government during the initial trial.
68) The AFCCA denied the defense writ of error coram vobis.
First, then: Was this writ of error
a suit, in the sense in which that term is used in the amendment?
3] or where is drawn in question the construction of any clause of the constitution, or of a treaty, or statute of, or commission held under the United States, and the decision is against the title, right, privilege or exemption specially set up or claimed by either party, under such clause of the said Constitution, treaty, statute or commission, (39) may be re-examined and reversed or affirmed in the Supreme Court of the United States upon a writ of error
United States, the Court of Military Review used this second Bauman factor to deny a writ of error