Document Type


Publication Date



This piece highlights features of our current law that converge to say that we should reconsider Ross: (1) the utility of counsel on discretionary review, which has been underexplored, both before and after Ross; (2) the increased importance, in modern criminal law, of direct appeals; and relatedly, the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of AEDPA that has moved most of the significant windows for substantive criminal law change into the direct appeal; and, finally, (3) perhaps an increased sliver of doctrinal sunlight in which to think about chipping away at Ross. Given the first two developments, the possible window to think of shifting the doctrine comes at an opportune time. This article first provides the background on Ross and the law of appellate right to counsel, then explores each of these in turn.

Included in

Criminal Law Commons