CHARLESTON — Last week’s back-and-forth between West Virginia’s Supreme Court and its Chamber of Commerce has laid bare the prevailing criticism of the Mountain State’s judicial system.

Chief Justice Robin Davis touched off the exchange when she stood by her court’s handling of civil and criminal appeals.

“Some have claimed that there is no right to appeal in West Virginia,” Davis told lawmakers. “That’s just flat wrong.”

Those who say that include the chamber. The business group fired off an open letter to Davis following her remarks. Sticking with its stance, Chamber President Steve Roberts wrote that Davis’ statements “have caused great confusion.”

Supreme Court Clerk Rory Perry then responded on the chief justice’s behalf.

“Your letter underscores the deep misunderstanding that members of the public have about proceedings in this Court,” Perry said in his open letter. “(U)nder current law, every West Virginia litigant has the absolute right to file an appeal from a final decision of the circuit courts.”

The dispute may boil down to whether the “right to appeal” is the same as an “appeal of right.” The chamber, and other critics of West Virginia’ judiciary, contend that an “appeal of right” means more than the ability to file an appeal petition.

Such outside observers as the National Center of State Courts and the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics appear to side with the chamber on that question. So does the recent judicial study commissioned by Gov. Joe Manchin. And even Davis herself seemed to concede that a fuller review of criminal convictions may be warranted.

The nonpartisan center, the federal bureau and the Conference of State Court Administrators noted the different appeals processes in their most recent joint review of state judiciaries.

“Mandatory jurisdiction cases are those in which an appellate court is required to hear the merits of the case,” they explained in their 2007 Examining the Work of State Courts. “In contrast, the appellate court may choose whether or not to entertain a case that falls within its discretionary jurisdiction. If the court declines review of a discretionary appeal, the decision of the lower court stands.”

The report’s analysis of appeals heard that year found West Virginia alone with an entirely discretionary caseload. Among the rest, either an intermediate appeals court or the “court of last resort” heard mandatory appeals.

The only other state to come close is New Hampshire. Like West Virginia and nine other states, it lacks a midlevel appeals court. But it has long considered death penalty appeals automatic, and in 2004 adopted a “mandatory appeal” rule for other cases.

An earlier, extensive review of state appeals courts by the center counted 37 states where “final judgments of the trial court may be appealed as a matter of right” for all cases, and for at least some cases in another dozen.

But of West Virginia, it said such judgments “may be appealed by filing a petition and record. There are no automatic appeals. They are entirely discretionary with the court.”