
A federal conviction carries life-changing consequences—and the federal appellate process is demanding, procedural, and deadline-driven. If legal errors affected the outcome of your case, a federal criminal appeal may provide a path to relief.
Inflexible deadlines apply. Start your review today.
Admitted to Practice In
Federal appellate rights are time-sensitive. The appeal process typically begins immediately after sentencing, and missing a deadline can foreclose options.
14 Days
In federal criminal cases, the Notice of Appeal must be filed within 14 days after the entry of judgment. There is almost no margin for delay.
1 Year
For individuals seeking federal relief from a state court conviction. Generally subject to a strict one-year statute of limitations.
1 Year
The primary path for post-conviction relief for those in federal custody. Generally must be filed within one year of a final judgment.

A federal appeal is not a second trial. In most cases, the appellate court reviews what happened in the district court to determine whether legal errors occurred and whether those errors require relief.
Harmful rulings on suppression motions or other pretrial motions that shaped the evidence the jury heard.
Evidentiary rulings, limits on cross-examination, or other trial errors that undermined the defense or distorted the fact-finding process.
Instructions that misstated the law, failed to give a requested instruction, or limited your defenses in the jury room.
Guideline calculations, enhancements, reasonableness, or sentences that are not authorized under federal law.

Strategic Counsel for Federal Appeals & Habeas Corpus
Mark Yurachek approaches federal appeals with record discipline, identified by careful evaluation of whether the record suggests viable appellate issues. For over two decades, he has helped clients navigate the demanding procedural requirements of the federal courts.
Federal appellate work rewards preparation and clarity. We focus on a small number of strong issues tied to the relief sought, supported by writing that is straightforward and strategically organized.
Mark has handled extensive federal litigation, including direct appeals and Federal Habeas Corpus motions (§ 2254 & § 2255), focusing on preservation, posture, and standards of review.
Federal appeals follow a structured process governed by federal rules and circuit practice.
We identify procedural posture, confirm deadlines, and evaluate whether the record suggests viable appellate issues.
Federal appeals are built on the district court record—transcripts and exhibits. The record frames what the court can consider.
Effective briefing is focused. We select issues that fit the record, standards of review, and the best path to relief.
Briefing requires precision and citation discipline. Oral argument may be granted for complex legal questions.
Outcomes may include reversal or remand. If denied, post-conviction options (Habeas) may still exist.
Not every error results in relief. Federal appellate courts focus on preservation, the standard of review, and whether the error was truly prejudicial. Here is what we evaluate.
Unlawful searches, warrant exceptions, and statement/interrogation issues tied to district court rulings.
Improper admission or exclusion of evidence, and limits on cross-examination that distort fact-finding.
Guideline calculation mistakes, enhancements, and procedural or substantive unreasonableness.
Misstatements of law, refusal of requested instructions, or confusing charges that mislead the jury.
Confrontation Clause violations and fairness issues ranging from trial conduct to structural errors.
Ineffective assistance of counsel and other post-conviction claims often raised after direct appeal.
"Mark was communicative throughout the process, and he really cared about my case and getting results. He kept all expectations grounded in reality. This is the guy you want on your side!"
Kalen