Articles Posted in Up Periscope

Lee decided by NMCCA
Philip D. Cave

DMLHS at CAAFLog is reporting a decision in United States v. Lee. NMCCA did not find error on any of the reasons advocated by the appellant. However, they set-aside the findings and authorized a rehearing. DMLHS notes that Capt Lee was represented by a non-Code 45 advocate: I listened to the oral argument. Captain Lee…

Continue reading ›
Wilkins summary disposition
Philip D. Cave

On 27 July CAAF issued a summary disposition in: No. 11-0486/NA. U.S. v. Akeem A. WILKINS. CCA 201000289. Review granted on the following issue: WHETHER APPELLANT’S RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW WAS VIOLATED WHEN HE WAS CONVICTED FOR ABUSIVE SEXUAL CONTACT AS A LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE OF AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT. The decision of the…

Continue reading ›
Prosecutorial misconduct
Philip D. Cave

Take a look at United States v. Magnon, in which NMCCA finds that a prosecutors closing argument on the merits was: The trial counsel’s argument was inartful; it was not a model of how a trial counsel should close his case; and it was improper. While portions of his argument might have been subject to…

Continue reading ›
Crawford
Philip D. Cave

Where are we at. CrimProfBlog brings us: Cicchini on the Confrontation Clause Michael D. Cicchini has posted Dead Again: The Latest Demise of the Confrontation Clause (Fordham Law Review, Vol. 80, 2011) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: In Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court abandoned its Roberts “reliability” approach to the right of confrontation.…

Continue reading ›
MRE 404(b)
Philip D. Cave

Federal Evidence Review brings to us a useful argument about the “notorious” slippery slope between propensity evidence and evidence admitted under Mil. R. Evid. 404(b). I’ve noted elsewhere the tendency of prosecutors of making talismanic assertions that, “it’s evidence of intent, motive, modus, your honor.” The defense and judges need to hold the prosecution to…

Continue reading ›
AFFCA on LIO’s
Philip D. Cave

In United States v. McLean, the AFFCA determined that aggravated assault is an LIO of maiming. The defense theory on appeal, but not at trial, was that the AA was not a listed LIO (an issue addressed in Jones). Just because it is or isn’t listed as an LIO in the RCM is not an…

Continue reading ›
Lessons from Casey
Philip D. Cave

Richard Gabriel was the defense jury consultant in that case. Here is his piece on the case. Many of the hosts and regular guests of the HLN have admitted that they believed Casey Anthony to be guilty either before or during the trial. And it was with this prejudgment that both the press and the…

Continue reading ›
Habeas in the 10th
Philip D. Cave

Brown v. United States. Petitioner sought relief for insufficiency of proof on a rape conviction and recalculation of some sentence credit. Petitioner now claims his pretrial confinement was 230 days instead of 210, and seeks adjustment by this court of his military sentence. As respondents point out, however, petitioner failed to include this claim in…

Continue reading ›
Worth the read – 250611
Philip D. Cave

The new online edition of The Jury Expert has several articles of interest to the trial practitioner. Narrative Persuasion in Legal Settings. The authors note the extensive research on rhetorical or argument based communications to the “jury” with narrative communications. While the research into narrative argument is relatively young, there are useful considerations for todays…

Continue reading ›
MAJ Hasan update
Philip D. Cave

San Antonio News-Express reports: Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan won’t go on trial until March, but the Army already has selected 12 potential jurors. The jury, however, isn’t coming from Fort Hood, where Hasan is accused of gunning down 45 people in a 2009 shooting spree. In what attorneys say is a bow to concerns about…

Continue reading ›

Client Reviews

Many years after retiring from the USN, I suddenly found myself in a very unwelcome legal matter with the Navy. It was a total shock and I was very concerned as to the impact this would have on me and my...

Rob

I was facing accusations that would not only ruin my career but my life. When I hired Mr. Freeburg, he gave me the hope that everything would be turn out great. He put a great team together along with my...

Air Force Anonymous

Phil Cave has helped me through NJP and restoration of my security clearance. He even came to visit me in Spain. I never thought I would work again and he certainly through with advise and guidance that we're...

Bryan

Mr. Nathan Freeburg fought and won a war for me. A war where my life was on the line. The week of trial was extremely long but he never seemed like he was tired. The prosecution were getting whittled down each...

Navy Anonymous

Mr. Cave saved my military retirement! His promise to me from day one was that he would fight as hard as he could he right the wring that had been done to me. And he did! I am so very thankful and grateful to...

Crystal

Mr. Freeburg is passionate about justice and upholding the law and dignity of the court. He is brave and bold in his ability to represent his clients amidst the attempted intimidation and procedural pressure...

Navy Represented

The Army and prosecution was pushing for me to take a Chapter 10. But Mr. Freeburg made me confident we could win. We went to trial and he crushed them in cross examination and he saved my career.

Vince

Contact Us

  1. 1 Free Consultation
  2. 2 Over 40 Years of Experience
  3. 3 Dedicated to Military Law
Fill out the contact form or call us at 703-298-9562 to schedule your free consultation.

Leave Us a Message