Question regarding appeal process

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

I had a hearing before a District Judge on the charges of "Criminal Trespass" and "Disorderly Conduct." I was found Not Guilty on the charge of disorderly conduct and Guilty on the charge of criminal trespass. I represented myself on these charges. I was informed that I have 30 days to appeal this ruling. When I go to the website of my local courthouse and read the information regarding a summary appeal it states "You are requesting a Hearing De Novo, which means that a hearing will be held as if no action was taken at the Magisterial District Judge level."

Question: If I file a summary appeal in an attempt to appeal the decision of the lower court regarding the Criminal Trespass charge, will I once again have to defend myself against the disorderly conduct charge. The way the local courthouse words it makes it sound like the district judge hearing never happened, which would once again have me facing two charges. Obviously, I only want to appeal the charge I was found guilty of.

I hope this question was worded in a way that makes sense and I thank any member of this forum that is able to provide feedback.

After conviction and sentencing, a defendant has the opportunity to file an appeal of his sentence. If the conviction results from a guilty plea, the defendant may have to ask for "leave" or permission to appeal the conviction. If the conviction results from a trial, the defendant has an absolute right to appeal. An appeal is not a retrial of the case, but is an examination of the trial record to ensure that proceedings were conducted in a fair manner.

The parties to an appeal submit written "briefs" to the appellate court, along with a copy of the trial court transcript and any exhibits that were used at trial. Oral arguments may be scheduled. Arguments are typically very short in duration, and tend to be academic in nature, focusing on legal issues.

Appellate review of a conviction is a bit like watching a videotape of a football game, to look for errors by the referees. If the referees make a lot of errors in a close game, you may get the feeling that their mistakes changed the result of the game. However, even if they made a lot of errors, the score can be so lopsided that you conclude that the errors did not affect the outcome. The judges on appeal are looking for errors which may have changed the verdict, and will disregard "harmless errors," which they believe did not have an effect. They judges will also disregard what they deem to be mistakes of "trial strategy" - a concept that is akin to when the coach chooses a play that doesn't work out the way he intended.

Among the types of error you may hear described are the following:

Fundamental Error
An error which goes to the heart of the case, and which can be considered by the court "in the interest of justice," even if the appellant fails to properly raise the issue on appeal.

Harmful Error
An error which the appellate court concludes had a probable impact on the outcome of the trial.

Harmless Error
An error which the appellate court concludes had no effect on the outcome of a trial. For example, if a defendant confesses to a murder, and the prosecution has his fingerprints on the murder weapon, the use of inadmissible "hearsay" testimony is likely to be found "harmless," due to the "overwhelming evidence" against the defendant.

Invited Error
Where the appellant asks the trial court to make a ruling which is actually erroneous, that party cannot later appeal the trial court's decision on the basis of that error.

Reversible Error
An error which causes the appellate court to overturn the lower court's decision is a "reversible error."

If you win your appeal, the prosecutor will have the option of appealing to a higher court. Quite often, after a defendant wins an appeal, the prosecutor will offer a defendant the opportunity to plead guilty to an offense, with a sentence of "time served." This can be a good deal for a defendant, who may not want to risk being again convicted if the case is retried, and whose immediate priority may well be getting out of prison. However, sometimes the defendant will insist that he is innocent, and will demand a new trial. Other times, the prosecutor will refuse to plea bargain, insisting that the defendant belongs in prison.

Peligroso27, thank you for the information, but I am not sure that it is what I am looking for. In PA appealing a decision from a District Magistrate is not the same as appealing to an actual appeals court. When you are charged with a Summary Offense in PA and you plead Not Guilty then you have a hearing at the District Magistrate level. If, after the decision of the Magistrate, you wish to file what is known as a "Summary Appeal" then you simply go to Clerk of Courts at the local courthouse and fill out a one page form that you are appealing the decision. This will give you a new hearing, but this time it is held at the Court of Common Pleas level where the state is represented by a prosecutor, as opposed to the Magistrate level where it is the defendant v. the arresting officer. Should you appeal THIS decision, then you would be appealing to an actual appellate court in which you described.

I appealed a decision by a District Magistrate once before so I know the process that I need to go through. I am more concerned with the question in my original post regarding the fact that I was found not guilty on one charge and guilty on another. I might need someone from PA to answer this question due to the structure of the judicial system.

Again, I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my post and providing the information that you did.

I know that in Virginia, if the defendant does a de novo appeal of a guilty verdict with a given sentence, it is possible that the appeal will result in a guilty verdict with an even worse sentence.

So I would assume that your not guilty verdict is subject to reversal in the appeal.

Edited to add: Or maybe not. It might be possible to just appeal the guilty verdict, without appealing the not guilty verdict. Maybe someone who knows will respond.

YOU can't appeal the not guilty verdict, only the State can. You are only appealing the charge on which you were convicted. Unless the State appeals the not guilty verdict, which trust me they won't, you are done with that charge. Appealing the other charge will not resurrect the one you were acquitted of. That would be considered double jeopardy.

And as you correctly stated, when an appeal is trial de novo it is not an appeal of error committed at trial. You literally just do the trial over.