Philippine Legal Context

An accused convicted by a Regional Trial Court in an expedited criminal case is not without remedy. Even though the case was heard under a special or accelerated procedure, the conviction remains subject to the constitutional and procedural safeguards available in criminal litigation. The accused may challenge the conviction through the remedies allowed by the Rules of Court, special procedural rules on expedited criminal actions, and constitutional guarantees of due process, presumption of innocence, and the right to appeal.

The central question is: After conviction by the Regional Trial Court, what remedy is available to the accused?

In general, the remedy depends on the nature of the judgment, the offense involved, the penalty imposed, whether the conviction was rendered in the RTC’s original or appellate jurisdiction, and whether the case falls under the rules on expedited criminal proceedings. In most cases, the principal remedy is appeal, but certain post-judgment remedies may also be available before appeal, during appeal, or after finality.

1. What Are Expedited Criminal Cases?

Expedited criminal cases are criminal actions governed by simplified or speedier procedural rules designed to reduce delay, avoid unnecessary postponements, and promote prompt disposition of cases. They are commonly associated with offenses that are less complex, involve lighter penalties, or are suitable for streamlined proceedings.

The purpose of expedited criminal procedure is not to weaken the rights of the accused. It is to make the process faster while preserving the essential requirements of criminal justice.

Even in expedited proceedings, the prosecution must still prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The accused retains the rights to counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, to confront witnesses, to present evidence, to remain silent, and to appeal a conviction where allowed by law.

2. RTC Conviction: Why the Nature of RTC Jurisdiction Matters

Before identifying the proper remedy, one must determine whether the RTC rendered the conviction in the exercise of:

Original jurisdiction, or
Appellate jurisdiction.

This distinction is crucial.

A. RTC Acting in Original Jurisdiction

The RTC acts in original jurisdiction when the criminal case was filed and tried directly before it. This usually involves offenses within the RTC’s jurisdiction because of the nature of the offense or the penalty prescribed by law.

If the RTC convicts the accused in its original jurisdiction, the usual remedy is an appeal to the Court of Appeals, except in cases where the law or rules require a different mode of review.

B. RTC Acting in Appellate Jurisdiction

The RTC acts in appellate jurisdiction when the case originated in a lower court, such as the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, and was appealed to the RTC.

If the RTC affirms or modifies a conviction from a first-level court, the remedy is generally not an ordinary appeal as a matter of right to the Court of Appeals. The accused usually proceeds by petition for review under the proper rule.

3. Ordinary Remedy: Appeal

The basic remedy of an accused after conviction is appeal. In criminal cases, appeal is a statutory right. It is not automatic; it must be exercised in the manner and within the period provided by the rules.

An appeal allows a higher court to review the judgment of conviction. Depending on the issues raised, the appellate court may examine questions of fact, questions of law, or both.

The accused may ask the appellate court to:

reverse the conviction;
acquit the accused;
reduce the penalty;
modify civil liability;
exclude improperly admitted evidence;
correct procedural or constitutional errors;
order a new trial, where legally justified;
remand the case for further proceedings, if necessary.

4. Period to Appeal

In criminal cases, the notice of appeal must generally be filed within the period provided by the Rules of Court. The usual period is fifteen days from promulgation of judgment or notice of the final order appealed from.

The period may be interrupted by a timely motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration, where such motion is allowed. After denial of the motion, the accused has the remaining period within which to perfect the appeal.

Because appeal periods are strict, counsel should act immediately after conviction. Failure to appeal on time may cause the judgment to become final.

5. How to Appeal an RTC Conviction Rendered in Original Jurisdiction

If the RTC convicted the accused in the exercise of original jurisdiction, the normal mode of appeal is by filing a notice of appeal with the RTC that rendered the judgment.

The notice of appeal should identify:

the accused;
the judgment being appealed;
the court to which the appeal is taken;
the date of promulgation or receipt;
the intention to appeal.

Once the appeal is perfected, the records are elevated to the appellate court. The accused may later file an appellant’s brief or memorandum, depending on the applicable procedure.

6. Appeal to the Court of Appeals

Most RTC convictions in criminal cases are reviewed by the Court of Appeals, unless the penalty, nature of the offense, or applicable law places the case directly within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court or another mode of review.

The Court of Appeals may review both factual and legal issues. This is important because criminal convictions often turn on credibility of witnesses, appreciation of evidence, sufficiency of proof, and alleged procedural errors.

The accused may argue, among others, that:

the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt;
the trial court misappreciated the evidence;
the prosecution witnesses were not credible;
there were material inconsistencies in the testimony;
the elements of the offense were not established;
the accused’s constitutional rights were violated;
inadmissible evidence was considered;
lawful defenses were ignored;
the penalty imposed was incorrect;
civil liability was improperly awarded.

7. Appeal When the RTC Acted in Appellate Jurisdiction

If the case originated in a first-level court and was appealed to the RTC, the RTC’s judgment is generally reviewed by the Court of Appeals through a petition for review, not by ordinary notice of appeal.

This distinction matters because a petition for review is discretionary in form. The Court of Appeals may deny due course if the petition fails to show reversible error, is procedurally defective, or raises issues not proper for review.

The petition should carefully state:

the material dates;
the proceedings in the lower courts;
the errors allegedly committed by the RTC;
the legal and factual basis for reversal;
the relief sought.

In expedited criminal cases, where simplified procedures may apply, counsel should still verify the correct mode of review because the wrong remedy may result in dismissal.

8. Motion for Reconsideration Before Appeal

An accused may consider filing a motion for reconsideration of the judgment of conviction, where allowed.

A motion for reconsideration asks the same court to re-examine its decision. It may be useful when the conviction contains clear factual or legal errors, such as:

misapplication of the law;
incorrect penalty;
overlooked evidence;
mistaken finding on an element of the offense;
improper award of damages;
failure to consider a defense;
clerical or mathematical error;
reliance on inadmissible evidence.

However, counsel must be careful. A motion for reconsideration does not replace an appeal. It must be timely filed, and counsel must monitor the remaining appeal period.

9. Motion for New Trial

A motion for new trial may be available after conviction but before judgment becomes final, on grounds recognized by the Rules of Court.

Common grounds include:

errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused; or
newly discovered evidence that could not, with reasonable diligence, have been discovered and produced at trial, and which would probably change the judgment if admitted.

Newly discovered evidence must be genuinely new, material, and likely to affect the result. Evidence that merely corroborates or impeaches, or evidence that could have been produced earlier with reasonable diligence, may not be sufficient.

A motion for new trial is not a second chance to retry the case merely because the defense lost. It is an exceptional remedy.

10. Reopening of Proceedings

Before judgment becomes final, a court may in proper cases allow reopening of proceedings to prevent a miscarriage of justice. This is distinct from appeal and new trial.

Reopening may be considered where there is a need to receive additional evidence that is material and essential to a just resolution. It is discretionary and must be justified by compelling reasons.

For an accused convicted in an expedited case, reopening may be relevant if the accelerated procedure resulted in the non-presentation of crucial evidence through no fault of the accused, or if substantial rights were affected by procedural constraints.

11. Bail Pending Appeal

After conviction by the RTC, the accused may apply for bail pending appeal, subject to constitutional and procedural limits.

The availability of bail depends largely on the penalty imposed and the nature of the offense.

A. Before Conviction

Before conviction, bail is generally a matter of right for offenses not punishable by reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment, or death, subject to exceptions.

B. After RTC Conviction

After conviction by the RTC, bail is no longer always a matter of right. It may become discretionary, especially if the penalty imposed exceeds the threshold set by the rules or if circumstances show risk of flight, recidivism, or danger to the community.

If the conviction carries a severe penalty, bail may be denied. If bail is allowed, the court may impose conditions.

An application for bail pending appeal should address:

the penalty imposed;
the accused’s previous compliance with bail conditions;
lack of flight risk;
community ties;
absence of danger to the public;
non-recidivism;
health, age, or humanitarian considerations, where relevant;
substantial issues on appeal.

12. Stay of Execution of Judgment

In criminal cases, timely appeal generally prevents the judgment from becoming final and executory. However, the treatment of custody, bail, civil liability, and other consequences depends on the case.

If the accused is on bail, the court may continue, cancel, or modify bail depending on the penalty and applicable rules. If the accused is detained, counsel may seek appropriate relief pending appeal, including bail if legally available.

Civil liability awarded in the criminal judgment may also be affected by appeal, but the precise consequences depend on the nature of the judgment and the appealed issues.

13. Effect of Failure to Appeal

If the accused does not appeal within the required period, the judgment of conviction becomes final. Once final, the conviction may be entered in the book of judgments, and the sentence may be executed.

A final judgment generally becomes immutable. This means it can no longer be changed, except in limited circumstances recognized by law, such as correction of clerical errors, nunc pro tunc entries, void judgments, or other exceptional remedies.

Thus, an accused who intends to challenge a conviction must act within the appeal period.

14. Possible Issues to Raise on Appeal

An appeal is not merely a request for mercy. It must identify specific errors. In an expedited criminal case, possible appellate issues include both ordinary criminal-law issues and procedure-specific issues.

A. Failure to Prove the Elements of the Offense

The prosecution must prove each element beyond reasonable doubt. If one element is missing, acquittal is proper.

B. Insufficient Identification of the Accused

The accused cannot be convicted unless identified as the perpetrator beyond reasonable doubt. Weak, inconsistent, or unreliable identification may justify reversal.

C. Credibility Errors

The trial court’s assessment of credibility is generally respected, but not conclusive. Appellate courts may reverse when the trial court overlooked facts, misread testimony, relied on improbable statements, or ignored material contradictions.

D. Violation of the Right to Counsel

If the accused was arraigned, tried, or convicted without proper assistance of counsel, the conviction may be vulnerable to attack.

E. Invalid Arraignment or Plea

A valid arraignment is essential. The accused must be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. A defective arraignment or improvident plea may affect the validity of proceedings.

F. Denial of Right to Present Evidence

Expedited procedure cannot justify denial of the accused’s right to present material evidence. If the defense was unfairly prevented from presenting witnesses or exhibits, this may be a serious due process issue.

G. Improper Admission of Evidence

Evidence obtained or admitted in violation of constitutional or procedural rules may be challenged. Examples may involve illegal searches, custodial investigation violations, hearsay, unauthenticated documents, or improper electronic evidence.

H. Variance Between Charge and Proof

The accused must be convicted only of the offense charged or necessarily included in it. A fatal variance may require acquittal or modification.

I. Prescription

If the offense had already prescribed before filing or institution of proceedings, the case may be dismissed.

J. Double Jeopardy

If the accused was previously placed in jeopardy for the same offense, a second prosecution or conviction may be unconstitutional.

K. Incorrect Penalty

Even if conviction is sustained, the penalty may be modified if the trial court misapplied the law, failed to consider mitigating circumstances, imposed an excessive penalty, or miscomputed subsidiary imprisonment, fines, or accessory penalties.

L. Improper Civil Liability

The civil award may be reduced, deleted, or modified if unsupported by evidence or inconsistent with law.

15. Special Considerations in Expedited Criminal Cases

Expedited criminal procedure affects how the case is handled, but it does not eliminate the right to a fair trial.

The accused may question a conviction if the expedited process caused substantial prejudice. Examples include:

insufficient time to prepare;
denial of reasonable opportunity to consult counsel;
improper refusal of necessary postponement;
denial of compulsory process;
inability to confront witnesses;
use of affidavits without proper opportunity for cross-examination, where cross-examination was required;
judgment based on incomplete or improperly received evidence;
failure to observe mandatory procedural safeguards.

Courts balance the goal of speedy justice with the constitutional rights of the accused. Speed cannot replace fairness.

16. Judgment Based on Plea of Guilty

Some expedited criminal cases may involve plea bargaining or simplified disposition after the accused enters a plea.

If the conviction followed a plea of guilty, the available remedies may be narrower, but not necessarily unavailable.

The accused may challenge the judgment if:

the plea was improvident;
the accused did not understand the nature of the charge;
the accused was not assisted by counsel;
the court failed to conduct the required searching inquiry in serious cases;
the penalty imposed was unlawful;
the plea bargain was invalid;
the accused was misled or coerced;
the facts do not support the offense admitted.

A plea of guilty does not authorize an illegal sentence.

17. Conviction After Promulgation: What Counsel Should Do Immediately

After RTC conviction, defense counsel should immediately take these steps:

obtain a copy of the judgment;
note the date of promulgation and receipt;
compute the appeal period;
discuss with the accused the right to appeal;
determine whether to file a motion for reconsideration, motion for new trial, or direct appeal;
evaluate bail pending appeal;
preserve trial records and transcripts;
identify appealable errors;
obtain copies of exhibits and orders;
file the proper remedy on time.

Delay is dangerous because post-conviction remedies are time-sensitive.

18. Notice of Appeal: Basic Form and Contents

A notice of appeal need not argue the entire case. Its purpose is to inform the court that the accused is appealing.

A simple notice may state:

Republic of the Philippines Regional Trial Court Branch ___ [City/Province]

People of the Philippines, Plaintiff,

-versus-

[Name of Accused], Accused.

Criminal Case No. _______

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Accused, through counsel, respectfully gives notice that he/she is appealing the Judgment dated [date], convicting him/her of [offense], to the proper appellate court.

Accused received/promulgation of the Judgment took place on [date]. This Notice of Appeal is filed within the reglementary period.

Respectfully submitted.

[Date and place]

[Counsel’s name, roll number, IBP/PTR/MCLE details, address]

This is only a basic template. Counsel should adapt it to the applicable rules and case posture.

19. Petition for Review From RTC Appellate Judgment

Where the RTC acted in appellate jurisdiction, the accused generally uses a petition for review. The petition is more detailed than a notice of appeal.

It should include:

names of parties;
material dates showing timeliness;
statement of facts;
proceedings before the first-level court and RTC;
errors committed by the RTC;
legal arguments;
relevant documents;
certified true copies when required;
prayer for reversal, acquittal, modification, or remand.

A defective petition may be dismissed. Timeliness and completeness are essential.

20. Appeal to the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court generally reviews questions of law. In criminal cases, certain judgments may reach the Supreme Court depending on the penalty imposed, the legal issues involved, or the route taken from the lower courts.

An accused may go to the Supreme Court through the proper mode, such as a petition for review on certiorari, when only questions of law are raised, or through other routes recognized in criminal procedure.

However, the accused must be careful. The Supreme Court is not ordinarily a trier of facts. If the appeal requires review of factual findings, the Court of Appeals is usually the proper forum first, unless the rules provide otherwise.

21. Certiorari Is Not a Substitute for Appeal

A petition for certiorari is an extraordinary remedy. It is used to correct acts done without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

It is not a substitute for a lost appeal.

An accused cannot ordinarily use certiorari simply because the judgment is unfavorable. However, certiorari may be considered where the trial court acted with grave abuse of discretion, such as:

convicting without jurisdiction;
denying fundamental due process;
refusing to allow a required remedy in a capricious manner;
acting in a way that renders the judgment void;
proceeding despite clear double jeopardy;
issuing a conviction in violation of basic constitutional rights.

If ordinary appeal is available and adequate, appeal is the proper remedy.

22. Habeas Corpus After Conviction

Habeas corpus is generally unavailable to review errors in a valid judgment of conviction. Once a person is detained under a final judgment by a court of competent jurisdiction, habeas corpus cannot be used as a substitute for appeal.

However, habeas corpus may be considered in exceptional cases, such as when:

the judgment is void;
the court had no jurisdiction;
the sentence has already been fully served;
the penalty or detention is illegal;
constitutional infirmities render the detention unlawful.

For an ordinary erroneous conviction, the remedy is appeal, not habeas corpus.

23. Post-Finality Remedies

Once the judgment becomes final, the remedies become limited. Still, certain remedies may exist depending on the circumstances.

A. Probation

If the penalty and offense qualify, the accused may apply for probation under the Probation Law. However, probation is subject to strict conditions and timing rules. Generally, applying for probation is inconsistent with pursuing an appeal from the judgment of conviction.

Probation is not an acquittal. It is a rehabilitative alternative to imprisonment, subject to court approval and supervision.

B. Executive Clemency

After conviction becomes final, the accused may seek executive clemency, such as pardon, commutation, or reprieve, subject to constitutional and administrative requirements.

C. Correction of Illegal Sentence

If the sentence is illegal, excessive, or beyond the authority of the court, corrective relief may be available even after judgment, depending on the circumstances.

D. Relief From Void Judgment

A void judgment may be attacked under recognized procedural principles. A judgment rendered without jurisdiction or in violation of fundamental due process may be void.

24. Probation as a Remedy After RTC Conviction

Probation deserves special attention because it is often considered by accused persons convicted of less serious offenses.

Probation may be available when the penalty imposed does not exceed the statutory threshold and the accused is not disqualified. Common disqualifications include certain serious offenses, prior convictions, or other grounds under the Probation Law.

The accused should understand the consequences:

probation is not an appeal;
it generally requires acceptance of the conviction;
it suspends execution of sentence if granted;
the accused must comply with probation conditions;
violation may result in revocation and service of sentence.

In choosing between appeal and probation, counsel must carefully evaluate the strength of appellate issues, the penalty imposed, the accused’s personal circumstances, and the risks of continued litigation.

25. When Acquittal Is the Proper Relief on Appeal

The appellate court should acquit when the prosecution evidence is insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Acquittal is proper when:

an element of the offense is missing;
identity of the accused is doubtful;
the prosecution evidence is inherently weak;
the testimony is unreliable;
the evidence is inadmissible and without it the case fails;
there is reasonable doubt;
a justifying or exempting circumstance is established;
the offense has prescribed;
double jeopardy applies.

The accused does not need to prove innocence. The prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt.

26. Modification Instead of Acquittal

Sometimes the appellate court may affirm guilt but modify the judgment. Modification may involve:

reducing the offense to a lesser included offense;
lowering the penalty;
applying mitigating circumstances;
deleting aggravating circumstances;
correcting the duration of imprisonment;
deleting or reducing fines;
correcting civil indemnity, damages, or restitution;
deleting unsupported accessory penalties;
adjusting subsidiary imprisonment.

Thus, even where acquittal is unlikely, appeal may still be valuable.

27. Civil Liability in Criminal Appeals

A criminal conviction may include civil liability arising from the offense. On appeal, the accused may challenge the civil award.

The accused may argue that:

no actual damages were proven;
the amount is excessive;
the complainant is not entitled to the award;
restitution was already made;
the civil action was reserved, waived, or separately instituted;
the court miscomputed the amount;
moral or exemplary damages lack basis;
interest was improperly imposed.

If the accused is acquitted, civil liability may or may not survive depending on the ground of acquittal. If acquittal is based on reasonable doubt, civil liability may sometimes remain if the act or omission and resulting damage are proven by preponderance of evidence. If acquittal is based on a finding that no act or omission attributable to the accused exists, civil liability based on the offense generally cannot stand.

28. Custody of the Accused During Appeal

After conviction, the accused’s custody status must be addressed. If the accused was previously on bail, the court may impose stricter conditions, require surrender, or deny continuation of bail depending on the penalty and the rules.

If the accused is detained, the period of preventive imprisonment may be credited under applicable law, subject to conditions.

Counsel should verify:

whether the accused must appear at promulgation;
whether the accused was taken into custody after conviction;
whether bail remains effective;
whether bail pending appeal is available;
whether the accused must file a new bail application;
whether the penalty imposed affects bail rights.

29. Promulgation of Judgment and Absence of the Accused

The promulgation of judgment is a critical stage. If the accused fails to appear without justifiable cause, consequences may follow, including loss of remedies or issuance of a warrant, depending on the rules and circumstances.

If the accused was absent for a valid reason, counsel should immediately move for appropriate relief and explain the absence.

The accused should not ignore promulgation, especially in criminal cases governed by expedited procedure.

30. Relationship Between Speedy Trial and Expedited Procedure

Expedited criminal procedure supports the constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases. However, the right belongs to both the accused and the public. It cannot be used to justify a rushed conviction that violates due process.

An accused may raise due process concerns where the speed of the proceedings impaired the ability to defend, such as:

denial of adequate time to prepare;
inability to subpoena witnesses;
refusal to consider material evidence;
denial of cross-examination;
mechanical application of deadlines despite prejudice.

The appellate court may review whether the accelerated procedure was applied fairly.

31. Strategic Choice: Appeal, Motion for Reconsideration, New Trial, or Probation

The accused and counsel must make a strategic decision soon after conviction.

Appeal is appropriate when:

there are substantial factual or legal errors;
acquittal is possible;
penalty reduction is possible;
constitutional violations occurred;
the accused maintains innocence;
civil liability is substantial;
the conviction has serious collateral consequences.

Motion for reconsideration is appropriate when:

the trial court overlooked a clear point;
the error is correctible by the same court;
the issue is narrow;
the appeal period can be safely preserved.

Motion for new trial is appropriate when:

new material evidence exists;
serious irregularities affected the trial;
the defense can meet the strict requirements.

Probation may be appropriate when:

the offense and penalty qualify;
the accused does not want to appeal;
rehabilitation is preferable to imprisonment;
the accused accepts the conviction for purposes of seeking probation;
the practical risks of appeal outweigh the benefits.

32. Practical Checklist for the Accused

After RTC conviction in an expedited criminal case, the accused should immediately:

get a copy of the judgment;
record the date of promulgation;
consult counsel immediately;
compute the deadline to appeal;
decide whether to file a motion for reconsideration or new trial;
decide whether to appeal;
consider bail pending appeal;
collect transcripts, exhibits, orders, and pleadings;
list all trial errors;
preserve all records;
avoid missing court dates;
comply with bail or custody conditions;
consider probation only after understanding its effect on appeal;
file the correct remedy on time.

33. Common Mistakes to Avoid

The accused should avoid these mistakes:

assuming expedited conviction cannot be appealed;
filing the wrong mode of appeal;
missing the appeal deadline;
filing a motion for reconsideration without tracking the remaining appeal period;
treating certiorari as a substitute for appeal;
applying for probation without understanding its effect;
failing to seek bail pending appeal when available;
ignoring the civil liability portion of the judgment;
failing to obtain transcripts and exhibits;
raising vague assignments of error;
relying only on emotional arguments instead of legal grounds;
failing to challenge the sufficiency of evidence;
not addressing custody status after conviction.

34. Sample Assignment of Errors on Appeal

Depending on the facts, the accused may raise errors such as:

I. The trial court gravely erred in finding the accused guilty despite the prosecution’s failure to prove all elements of the offense beyond reasonable doubt.

II. The trial court erred in giving full credence to the prosecution witnesses despite material inconsistencies and improbabilities in their testimony.

III. The trial court erred in disregarding the defense evidence.

IV. The trial court erred in admitting and relying upon inadmissible evidence.

V. The trial court erred in imposing an incorrect penalty.

VI. The trial court erred in awarding civil liability unsupported by competent evidence.

VII. The expedited procedure was applied in a manner that deprived the accused of due process and a reasonable opportunity to present a complete defense.

35. Sample Prayer in an Appeal Brief

WHEREFORE, premises considered, accused-appellant respectfully prays that the Judgment dated [date] of the Regional Trial Court, Branch ___, in Criminal Case No. ___ be REVERSED and SET ASIDE, and that accused-appellant be ACQUITTED on the ground of reasonable doubt.

In the alternative, accused-appellant respectfully prays that the judgment be MODIFIED by reducing the offense, correcting the penalty, deleting or reducing the civil liability, and granting such other reliefs as are just and equitable.

Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

36. Key Rule: The Remedy Must Match the Judgment

The most important practical rule is this:

If the RTC convicted the accused in the exercise of original jurisdiction, the usual remedy is appeal by notice of appeal to the Court of Appeals. If the RTC decided the case in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction, the usual remedy is a petition for review to the Court of Appeals.

This distinction should be checked before any pleading is filed.

Conclusion

The accused convicted by the RTC in an expedited criminal case may still pursue meaningful remedies. The expedited nature of the proceeding does not erase the right to due process, the presumption of innocence, or the right to seek review of a conviction.

The principal remedy is usually appeal, but the correct mode depends on whether the RTC acted in original or appellate jurisdiction. Before appeal, the accused may consider a motion for reconsideration or motion for new trial. During appeal, the accused may seek bail where allowed. After finality, limited remedies such as probation, correction of an illegal sentence, habeas corpus in exceptional cases, or executive clemency may be considered.

The accused must act quickly. The appeal period is short, the remedies are technical, and the consequences of delay may be severe. In every case, the safest course is to obtain the judgment, compute the deadline, identify the proper remedy, and file the appropriate pleading within the reglementary period.