Convictions
Convictions refer to the legal outcome of a criminal trial where a defendant is found guilty of a crime, usually after the prosecution successfully proves their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This process can occur through various means, including guilty pleas, pleas of nolo contendere (no contest), or verdicts rendered by a jury. Once a conviction is recorded, it leads to a formal judgment that significantly alters the defendant's legal status, often resulting in the loss of freedoms and certain rights, such as the ability to vote or own firearms.
The implications of a conviction can be profound, as they become permanent entries on a criminal record and may influence future sentencing, particularly for repeat offenses. Sentences for multiple convictions can be served either concurrently (at the same time) or consecutively (one after the other), affecting the total time a person spends in prison. Additionally, convictions can impact civil cases, as they may establish liability if the facts of the crime overlap with civil allegations. Overall, the conviction process is a critical aspect of the criminal justice system, balancing the prosecution's efforts to uphold the law with defendants' rights to defend themselves.
On this Page
Convictions
SIGNIFICANCE: The focus of all criminal trial proceedings is the prosecution’s efforts to obtain convictions by proving defendants guilty and the defendants’ efforts to avoid convictions.
Convictions may be established in several ways: Defendants may enter pleas of guilt, they may enter pleas of nolo contendere, or they may be found guilty at trial. In each instance, the courts enter final judgments, in which the factual and legal allegations are sustained, and orders of conviction. Upon entry of the orders, the courts may then proceed to the sentencing phase. The combined process of entering judgments, convictions, and penalties are known as the judgment and sentence phase.
A conviction may only be entered when the legal and factual allegations reach the appropriate level of proof. In all criminal matters, the level of proof required is beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the level of factual certainty in which no mere skeptical condition of the mind exists but in which the evidence may fall short of absolute proof beyond all doubt. It means simply that the proof must be so conclusive and complete that all realistic doubts of the facts are removed from the minds of ordinary persons.
After Convictions
The legal status of defendants changes substantially once they are convicted. Convictions bring with them restrictions and losses of certain due process and other rights. The most significant loss is that of the defendants’ freedom, which may be ordered as part of the sentences. In addition, convictions confer the status of having been found guilty of crimes. In some instances a conviction may also terminate or limit personal rights, such as the ability to own firearms, vote, be bonded, serve in the U.S. military, or obtain professional licenses, such as those of attorneys, medical doctors, or accountants.
Convictions are generally considered permanent parts of the defendants’ criminal records. A person who has multiple convictions—especially for the same or similar crimes—may receive an enhanced punishment for the later offenses. For example, in most states conviction of the felony crime of burglary carries penalties of from one to seven years in the states’ penal systems. Second and subsequent convictions generally increase punishments up to life in prison. Similar crimes carry similar punishments, which may be enhanced based on the type or number of prior convictions.
In instances in which more than one crime is charged against a defendant, each conviction may affect the penalties for any other convictions. In such instances, the courts tend to treat the companion cases either as separate crimes requiring individual punishments or as parts of a larger group of crimes.
The courts may run sentences concurrently or consecutively, depending on how they wish the individual convictions to be treated. Concurrent sentences are served and completed at the same time. For example, a person convicted both of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) and of manslaughter (both arising from the same set of facts), may be punished for both convictions at the same time. Thus, if a court were to order the defendant to serve a one-year sentence for the DUI conviction and a two-year sentence for the manslaughter conviction, the defendant would serve both sentences at the same time and spend a total of only two years in prison. By contrast, if a defendant were convicted of the exact same pair of crimes and instead received one- and two-year sentences to be served consecutively, the defendant would spend a total of three years in prison.
Convictions may also be used to prove conduct in civil cases as well. The burden of proof in criminal cases is higher than that required in civil actions. This means that once the burden is met for a criminal case, as proven through existence of the conviction, the burden will also be met for the civil action. The key is that the facts leading to the conviction must be the same as those used in the civil case. Thus, defendants who are convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol may find themselves civilly liable for car crashes arising from the same set of facts.
One must be careful when associating convictions with a jury trial. The duty of the jury is to determine the facts in a case. It is always the duty of the judge to determine the given law. A conviction can only be entered when both facts and law combine to prove the elements of the particular crime. While a jury may reach a verdict as to the facts, it is only the judge that may enter a conviction as part of the final judgment.
Bibliography
Christianson, Scott. Innocent: Inside Wrongful Conviction Cases. New York: New York University Press, 2004. Investigative reporter’s account of forty-two wrongful conviction cases.
Connors, E., T. Lundregan, N. Miller, and T. McEwen. Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial. Alexandria, Va.: National Institute of Justice, 1996. Close examination of some of the first cases of false convictions that were overturned by DNA evidence.
Hanson, Roger A. Federal Habeas Corpus Review: Challenging State Court Criminal Convictions. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1995. Statistical study of habeas corpus petitions in eighteen federal district courts in nine states.
LaFave, Wayne. Criminal Law Hornbook. 4th ed. Belmont, Calif.: West Publishing, 2003. Detailed treatise of criminal law with lengthy explanations and references to cases.
LaFave, Wayne R., Jerold H. Israel, and Nancy J. King. Criminal Procedure. 4th ed. St. Paul, Minn.: Thomson/West, 2004.
"Wrongful Convictions." National Institute of Justice Special Report, US Department of Justice, Dec. 2023, nij.ojp.gov/topics/justice-system-reform/wrongful-convictions. Accessed 25 June 2024.