Facts: Error/Omission
Did the opinion rely on a material mischaracterization of or failure to consider facts in the lower court record? (“Material”: it’s reasonably likely the error(s) affected the result.)
See Points & Authorities.

Law: Error/Misstatement
Did the opinion rely on a material misstatement of or failure to acknowledge settled law, or an inapplicable legal principle? (“Material”: it’s reasonably likely the error(s) affected the result.)
See Points & Authorities.

Issues: Omission/Mischaracterization/Unbriefed
Did the opinion mischaracterize or fail to consider/resolve a briefed issue whose resolution could have changed the result? Or materially rely on an issue unbriefed by the parties, in violation of GC 68081? (“Material”: it’s reasonably likely the error affected the result.)
See Points & Authorities.

Appellate Factfinding
Did the court improperly make its own factual or credibility determinations, instead of leaving them to the trier of fact?
See Points & Authorities.

Prejudice: Selective vs. Whole-Record Review
Where the court found or presumed trial error, did the court fail to conduct proper “whole-record” review and instead examine the record from an exclusively judgment-favoring perspective, ignoring other evidence or relevant non-evidentiary record factors?
See Points & Authorities.

Chapman: Shifting Burden
Where in a criminal case the court found or presumed federal constitutional trial error (Chapman v. California), did the court expressly or implicitly place on defendant the burden to show prejudice?
See Points & Authorities.