With a revision, it is possible to challenge a disadvantageous court ruling, provided that the court proceedings took place before the Regional Court. The revision is the only and final opportunity to have an unfavorable verdict reviewed. In cases that were initially tried in the District Court, the so-called appeal should be filed instead of a revision.
Many are unaware that the revision is a purely formal procedure in which only the legal correctness of the previous court ruling is examined. It concerns pure legal issues and does not involve a reassessment of witness statements or other evidence.
A revision lawyer must therefore be particularly skilled in identifying legal errors made by the court, which requires profound legal knowledge and, in many cases, even academic expertise.
Additionally, the revision courts impose extremely high requirements on the legal reasoning for a revision. Even minor errors by the revision lawyer can lead to inadmissibility, making the contested ruling final. For this reason, revision is considered the most challenging area of criminal law.
For the client, a revision also represents a very high risk. Not only must their lawyer be able to identify errors in a verdict, but they must also correctly challenge them, which has become increasingly difficult due to the high standards set by the revision courts. Without years of experience and particularly academic expertise, a successful revision is hardly possible today, as evidenced by the shockingly low success rate of 3–10%.
Therefore, the client must seek out a specialist in revision law to avoid failing due to mere formal hurdles. This is crucial, as most criminal defense lawyers do not specialize in revision law.
Our law firm, in addition to criminal defense, has a strong focus on revision. With a former prosecutor, three university lecturers, and attorneys working at the Judicial Academy, we offer not only the necessary practical expertise but also the required academic knowledge to help our clients achieve above-average success rates.
Which Court Decides?
In cases initially tried at the District Court, the revision is handled by the respective Higher Regional Court of the judicial district. Revisions of first-instance rulings from the Regional Court are decided by the Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe.
Deadlines
The revision must be filed within one week after the verdict is announced. If the verdict is announced on a Monday, the revision must be filed with the court (that convicted the defendant) by the following Monday.
The deadline for submitting the reasoning for the revision is one month after the written judgment is delivered.
These deadlines cannot be extended!
If the defendant has a lawyer, any missed deadlines on the lawyer’s part are not attributed to the defendant. In such cases, reinstatement can be requested within one week of becoming aware of the lawyer’s fault.
Filing the Revision
Filing a revision—i.e., informing the court that the verdict is being contested—should not be confused with submitting the reasoning for the revision. Unfortunately, serious mistakes often occur here:
A fatal and irreparable mistake occurs when the revision is justified at the same time it is filed—for example, by stating that a violation of formal and substantive law is being alleged. Filing and justifying the revision simultaneously signals to the revision court that the applicant lacks expertise in revision law. Without knowledge of the written judgment and access to the trial transcript, legal errors in the case—and especially procedural errors—cannot yet be properly addressed!
Therefore, when filing a revision, it is crucial to only request access to the full case files, including the main hearing transcript (especially given the tight deadline for submitting reasoning), and to avoid any additional statements.
Should the Revision Be Filed Partially or Completely?
The defendant is generally free to decide how much of the ruling should be reviewed. It is essential to consider whether the revision should be limited to specific points, such as the question of probation, the severity of the penalty, or individual charges. Limiting the revision excludes other points from review by the revision court, making them final. This approach is advisable if there is concern that the prosecution may also file a revision, potentially worsening the outcome of the contested conviction. If the prosecution does not file a revision, the defendant’s ruling cannot be worsened by their own revision.
However, to maximize the chances of having a ruling overturned, the revision complaint should be filed against the entire verdict.
Reasoning the Revision – The Supreme Discipline in Criminal Law
Most criminal lawyers do not specialize in revision law. The matter is further complicated by its significant complexity. The strict formal requirements often lead to a revision being deemed inadmissible. Without expertise and specialized knowledge, successful legal representation in a revision case is unlikely.
The revision can be justified by alleging a violation of formal (1) and substantive (2) law. These two complaints are fundamentally different and highly complex:
(1) Justifying a violation of formal errors requires identifying a procedural error, describing it precisely, and supporting it with extensive factual evidence.
A revision cannot claim that a witness testified differently than described in the judgment or that a testimony was not considered, unless contradictions arise from the judgment itself or the trial transcript. Identifying such errors requires years of experience and knowledge of all possible formal errors.
Additionally, lawyers must adhere to strict procedural rules: for example, referencing the transcript or judgment can render a complaint inadmissible. Many revisions fail because lawyers attach procedural facts as annexes instead of detailing them in the main text.
(2) In cases of substantive errors—misapplications of criminal laws or errors in the evaluation of evidence—the formal requirements for the lawyer are not as stringent as with procedural errors, but the legal knowledge required is much higher.
Errors in weighing evidence are only considered if conclusions are contradictory, unclear, contain gaps, or fail to discuss alternative possibilities. The revision court does not consider arguments that claim a court’s conclusions were unconvincing or a witness statement was more credible than the judgment suggests.
Further Course of the Revision Procedure
If the revision is admissible, the revision document is sent to the prosecution, which has one week to respond. After this, the case is forwarded to the General Prosecutor or the Federal Prosecutor’s Office, which usually requests the revision to be dismissed.
The defendant’s lawyer can respond to this within two weeks. It is crucial to check whether all legal objections have been addressed.
Possible Decisions of the Revision Court
The revision may result in:
- Rejection as inadmissible or clearly unfounded
- Complete annulment
- Acquittal
- Correction of the verdict
- Annulment of the sentencing decision
If a verdict is annulled, the case is usually referred back to another division or court for retrial.
In rare cases, a hearing before the revision court takes place, which requires exceptional expertise from the lawyer.
Summary
Revision in criminal proceedings is rightly considered very difficult and comes with high formal hurdles. Even the smallest mistakes can lead to inadmissibility, which is why the failure rate is generally extraordinarily high. However, this is not because judges rarely make mistakes—quite the opposite! Unfortunately, many lawyers are not sufficiently familiar with revision law, which differs significantly in its fundamental structure from general criminal procedure law. In addition to years of experience, profound academic expertise is essential.
Our law firm, consisting of specialist criminal lawyers and university lecturers, as well as a former prosecutor, is exclusively focused on criminal law. Each of our lawyers has further specialized in specific areas of criminal law, including revision proceedings. This allows us to offer our clients—similar to a specialist doctor in medicine—the highest level of expertise in a highly specialized field. As a result, we have successfully handled numerous revisions in criminal law and represent our clients nationwide.
Our law firm is committed to using dedicated, professional, and knowledgeable expertise to explore all legal possibilities in criminal proceedings and develop effective defense strategies that specifically target the typical weaknesses of the judicial system.
No other area of law has as many discretionary options, considering the broad range of legal consequences provided for in criminal proceedings: from case dismissal (with or without a financial penalty), to the written penalty order process, to the non-opening of proceedings, acquittal, warning, waiver of punishment, or prison sentences ranging from a few months to several years—with or without probation.
The outcome in criminal law depends significantly on the choice of the right lawyer.
However, similar to choosing a doctor, trust in being in the best possible hands is the most important factor in engaging a lawyer. You can contact us at any time in advance to get a personal impression of our experience and competence
* A (direct) revision of a judgment by the District Court is rarely advisable, as—unlike a conviction by the Regional Court—an appeal can still be filed here, offering significantly better chances of success for the client. Since the defense lawyer generally cannot reliably predict the outcome of a revision procedure, the so-called leap revision carries the risk that, if unsuccessful, the procedure becomes legally binding.
In the rare cases where the first-instance proceedings took place before a Higher Regional Court, a revision to the Federal Court of Justice is also possible.
