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 ›Friend and colleague draws attention to McGee v. McFadden, a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U. S. Supreme Court. Issues: (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit erred when it found no constitutional error when the state failed to disclose Brady evidence, a letter from a jailhouse snitch,…
Continue reading ›(cleaned up) Yes, back in 1976 I got my Bluebook and throughout the three years of law school, it was a regular reference. Ah, but it continues to be a daily tool–for motions, briefs, and such. I fear one day I’ll Bluebook a conversation with a relative or friend in everyday conversation. One of the…
Continue reading ›SCOTUSBlog has an interesting post about the court’s relist practice. Some of us discussed the relist option when the court was considering the petition in United States v. Sullivan, 74 M.J. 448 (C.A.A.F. 2015) cert. denied. When last we wrote about the statistics of relists a little over a year ago, it was to report…
Continue reading ›In preparing the petition for Schloff, we looked to the amount of cases coming through the system related to prosecutions under UCMJ art. 120. The Army is “reporting” about 60% of cases for last year were sexual assault/120 cases. We have not been able to gain similar “information” from the Air Force or Department of…
Continue reading ›On 30 November 2015, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Musacchio v. United States, a case of potential interest to military justice practitioners. There are two questions presented. (1) Whether the law-of-the-case doctrine requires the sufficiency of the evidence in a criminal case to be measured against the elements described in the jury instructions…
Continue reading ›The petition for a writ of certiorari has been filed in Sullivan v. United States, CGCMG 0285 (C.G. Ct. Crim. App. 25 September 2014)(unpub.), 74 M.J. 448 (C.A.A.F. 2014).
Continue reading ›The problem is that the CCA’s don’t do that enough. But at least they have the power. In United States v. Quick: The underlying issue is whether Article 66(d), UCMJ, authorizes the CCAs to order sentence-only rehearings. The government argues that the CCAs do not have that authority and asks that we overrule this court’s…
Continue reading ›Once again one of my two favorite evidence blogs (federal evidence review) has published the annual “review” for 2013 and for 2014. Key Evidence Issues During 2013 1. Supreme Court Watch: Fifth Amendment (Self-Incrimination Clause): Kansas v. Cheever: Allowing The Government To “Follow” Where The Defense Leads On Defense Expert Mental State Evidence 2. Supreme…
Continue reading ›
