Compared to other countries the proportion of decisions overturned through appeals is rather modest in France. Given the extremely narrow scope of the pourvoi en revision (petition to obtain a new trial after a final verdict) as outlined in this chapter, the conclusion seems warranted that many judicial errors go undetected or, at least, uncorrected, under the French system. However, the impact of wrongful convictions depends also on the type of sentences that apply. From this point of view, prior to 1981, the death penalty, as an irreversible sanction, gave special importance to the issue of wrongful conviction. The Federal judiciary system has 2 degrees of jurisdiction: trial and appellate jurisdiction, as well as the appeal to the Supreme Court. Verdicts become “final” once the time limit for an appeal has expired, or if all remedies have been exhausted. The pourvoi en revision is considered necessary since it would be inappropriate to let judicial errors stand. It nevertheless challenges the validity of final decisions. This chapter argues that wrongful convictions tend to delegitimate the criminal justice system as well as the authority of final decisions. The author asserts the procedures to revise final rulings by admitting and, if possible, correcting wrongful convictions need to remain exceptional. A number of prominent cases are reviewed in an attempt to make clear the limits of this remedy in the French legal system. Notes