NMCCA affirmed a Marine’s child pornography pleas despite claims that counsel pressured him during a recess and failed to hire a digital forensic expert. A military defense lawyer at Cave & Freeburg explains the takeaways. (rentas-nmcca-providence-ineffective-assistance-military-defense-lawyer) United States v. Rentas: When “Trash” Almost Sank a Plea—And the IAC Claim That Followed On 30 April 2026,…
Continue reading ›The Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals set aside an Airman’s drug conviction because the Government failed to prove delta-8 THC was a Schedule I controlled substance. A military defense lawyer at Cave & Freeburg explains what it means. (delta-8-thc-article-112a-byrd-military-defense-lawyer) Delta-8 THC and Article 112a, UCMJ: Why the Government Lost in United States v. Byrd…
Continue reading ›United States v. Guinsler — Case Summary, prepared by Phil Cave of Cave & Freeburg, LLP What the Court Decided in Guinsler In January 2026, a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia indicted Army soldier James Isaac Guinsler on four counts of coercion and enticement of a child and one count of…
Continue reading ›Reasonable doubt is the fundamental pillar protecting the rights of accused service members in a court martial. It is a legal standard that ensures a fair and just process and safeguards against the potential for wrongful convictions. The prosecutor must prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt, a crucial safeguard against false convictions. The BRD…
Continue reading ›Two recent decisions of CAAF condone unlawful or bad practices when OSI, CID, NCIS, and CGIS search cellphones; United States v. Shields and United States v. Lattin. As a result, the MCIOs are unlikely to change their unlawful or bad practices. More than sloppy police work gets two passes because the military appellate courts think…
Continue reading ›My argument is no, and as military defense lawyers, this is our position at a court-martial trial held under the UCMJ. In State v. Terrance Police, 2022 Conn. LEXIS 123 (May 10, 2022), the issue was whether “touch DNA” was good enough for probable cause to get an arrest warrant. Here is the important part…
Continue reading ›Prof. Colin Miller brings, The Admissibility of Statements Made to Doctors Consulted For the Purpose of Enabling Him/Her to Testify Federal Rule of Evidence 803(4) provides an exception the rule against hearsay for A statement that: (A) is made for — and is reasonably pertinent to — medical diagnosis or treatment; and (B) describes medical…
Continue reading ›Cheng & Mannion on Forensic Reports and the Confrontation Clause By CrimProf BlogEditor Share Edward K. Cheng and Cara Mannion (Vanderbilt Law School and affiliation not provided to SSRN) have posted Unravelling Williams v. Illinois (NYU Law Review Online) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: Forensics are a staple of modern criminal trials, yet what…
Continue reading ›Like it or not, consistent or not consistent with long-held notions of justice, a military member accused of a sexual assault is presumed guilty. Sure command and others will say you are going to get a fair hearing and trial, but that’s not reality. Over 100 Law Professors, Others Call on DOJ to Stop Junk-Science…
Continue reading ›We have a new book worth the read to litigators facing child assault allegations with Shaken Baby Syndrome “evidence.” Randy Papetti, The Forensic Unreliability of the Shaken Baby Syndrome: The Book. Arizona trial attorney Randy Papetti has brought nearly 20 years of experience and research to his valuable new analysis of shaken baby theory in…
Continue reading ›
