Statutes of limitations are legal deadlines for filing criminal charges. They are essential because: Statutes of limitations are crucial in preserving evidence and ensuring a fair trial. As time passes, evidence can deteriorate, witnesses can forget details or become unavailable, and memories can become less reliable. This can significantly hinder the fairness of a trial,…
Continue reading ›Generally When deciding what a word or term in a statute means, the rule of statutory interpretation is to give the word or term its plain and ordinary meaning. This is known as the plain meaning rule. If the word or term is clear and unambiguous, then the court will not look beyond the text…
Continue reading ›In this earlier blog, I commented on the pending litigation over unanimous verdicts at courts-martial. As military defense lawyers we continue to support the advice given that the issue should be raised in all courts going forward. The update is that the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has decided United States v. Anderson.…
Continue reading ›YOUR MILITARY DEFENSE COUNSEL SHOULD CHALLENGE THE APPLICATION OF THE MILITARY RULE OF EVIDENCE 311. THE RULE VIOLATES THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. WE ARE CHALLENGING THAT AT THE U. S. SUPREME COURT NOW. In many courts-martial, your military defense counsel will have to deal with evidence obtained from digital devices, like cell phones. The prosecution’s use…
Continue reading ›Military lawyers know that since the Supreme Court decided Ramos v. Louisiana, the U. S. military is the only federal jurisdiction that does not require unanimous findings of guilt. Currently, a military jury (called a Panel of Members) must have eight members in a general court-martial (12 if it’s a death penalty case) and four…
Continue reading ›A person being tried at court-martial may have their case dismissed before the members (jury) reach any findings. One way that can happen is when the military judge declares a mistrial. Your military defense lawyer should know what to do if the same charges are re-referred to a court-martial–the prosecution taking a second attempt to…
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 ›Be careful of who you talk to if you are in trouble. I think it’s fair to say that CAAF has narrowed the who and when requirement for an Article 31, UCMJ, warning, as illustrated in a recent Air Force case. Thus, Article 31(b), UCMJ, warnings are required when (1) a person subject to the…
Continue reading ›From Prof. Berman at Sentencing Law & Policy. As reported in this press release, yesterday “Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Mike Lee (R-UT), Ted Cruz (R-TX), David Perdue (R-GA), and Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced legislation to strengthen criminal intent protections in federal law.” Here is more from the press release: Their bill, the Mens Rea Reform…
Continue reading ›so starts a post at wrongfulconvictionsblog–Junk Science Reigns ____ So Much for True Science in the Courtroom. [W]hen the National Academy of Sciences report Forensic Science in the United States; A Path Forward was published people thought we might see a true effort to address “junk science being used to convict innocent people.” The report…
Continue reading ›
