In his own large printing, convicted killer Mark Smich lays out his grounds for appeal.

"My trial was unfair. The trial Judge made errors in his charge to the jury and other rulings."

That's it.

Smich, one of the men who shot Tim Bosma on May 6, 2013, stole his truck and cremated his remains, says his four-month trial ought to be redone.

He does not include a 13-point appendix laying out specifics like his co-offender Dellen Millard does in his notice of appeal. (Justice Andrew Goodman "erred in failing to grant the change of venue application; erred in permitting the introduction of the post-offence conduct evidence regarding the incineration of the deceased; erred in failing to grant the mistrial application …")

From Smich it is just two simple sentences handwritten and signed from his cell at the Hamilton-Wentworth Detention Centre.

It is not a surprise that Smich and Millard are appealing their first-degree murder convictions for killing Bosma.

Virtually all those convicted of the most serious crime in the criminal code do. It comes with an automatic sentence of life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years. So they have, after all, nothing to lose.

As well, within minutes of the jury handing down its guilty verdicts on June 17, lawyers for both men were promising to appeal.

What's interesting is the notice of appeal each offender has now filed.

The "offender appeals" are written, signed and submitted by the murderers themselves within the 30-day deadline. Millard completed his June 22. Smich finished his a day earlier.

Smich did all his work by himself. It is short and simple.

His trial lawyer, Thomas Dungey, says he will likely be retained by Smich to formally lay out the grounds for appeal in more detail.

"There are very strong grounds for appeal," he says.

An appeal must be based on an error in law made during the trial process.

If Smich is granted a leave to appeal — to actually make his case to the Court of Appeal for Ontario — that will be handled by an appellate lawyer.

Dungey confirms he will be Smich's lawyer for his next murder trial though.

Smich, 28, and Millard, 30, (both have birthdays next month) are charged with the first-degree murder of Laura Babcock, one of Millard's girlfriends, who vanished in June 2012.

Millard is further charged with the first-degree murder of his father, Wayne Millard, who was shot in November 2012. His death was originally ruled a suicide.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Millard's notice of appeal includes the forms filled out in his cell at the Hamilton-Wentworth Detention Centre. These are done in his own neat, tight printing, familiar to anyone who saw the reams of illegal jailhouse "love letters" smuggled out to one of his girlfriends, Christina Noudga. She will go on trial in Hamilton in November for accessory after the fact to murder for her alleged role in covering up Bosma's murder.

Attached to Millard's form is a two-page list of grounds for appeal. It seems likely this list was generated by Millard's lawyers, since it appears to be printed from a computer.

Ravin Pillay, Millard's trial lawyer, declined comment.

The list includes issues familiar to those who followed the trial.

Millard claims his rights were violated by improper searches and seizures from his farm (where The Eliminator livestock incinerator was found) and his home (where computers were found).

Millard says "the learned trial judge" made a mistake by allowing text messages regarding the acquisition of the Walther PPK gun — the murder weapon — to be admitted into evidence.

Closing addresses account for several grounds of appeal.

Millard takes issue with assistant Crown attorney Tony Leitch's final words in his day-long summation of the prosecution's case. Leitch implored to jurors: "Don't forget about Tim."

In his charge, Goodman told jurors to disregard that statement. Millard says the judge should, however, have remedied the problem immediately.

Millard also claims Dungey's fiery closing was "inflammatory" and not adequately corrected by the judge. And the judge's instruction to the jury that aspects of Pillay's closing "had no foundation in evidence" was improper.

Pillay had put forth a defence theory of what happened that night as though it was evidence. However the only actual testimony of the moment of the murder came from Smich, who took the stand. Millard did not testify.

This is only the beginning of the appeal process that generally takes months, if not years, to play out.