Scalia or Rehnquist has made statements to that effect too, I think. The idea is that judicial procedures should be quick, efficient, and formally correct, and past a certain point the only recourse is executive clemency.

Besides his prosecutor's bias Rehnquist seems to have an undue concern for the judge's supposedly heavy workload, and the administrative efficiency of the trial system. Almost as if he were combining the functions of a union leader for the judges and time-motion-study man for management.

This should refute the self-serving line one hears from many prosecutors that while defense attorneys are only in it to get their client off (innocent or guilty), prosecutors are seeking "the truth" or "justice", not a win at any cost.

I had law professors who swore by procedural due process, i.e., if the methodology for arriving at a legal conclusion 'works' then the practical effect doesn't matter. It seems to be that this viewpoint appeals to people who want to affirm the status quo in general. You would probably find them arguing that just about any form of hierarchy is fine the way it is, too.