Courtesy of FederalEvidence blog we have an update on Giles. In Giles v. California [documents at SCOTUSWiki], the Supreme Court [Giles the opinion] considered the application of the forfeiture by wrongdoing exception under the Confrontation Clause and likely Crawford v. Washington, which allows an unconfronted testimonial statement to be admitted where a defendant commits a…
Continue reading ›Court-Martial Trial Practice
Here is the most recent Supreme Court case on IAC claims and evaluation of them. Knowles v. Mirazanyance, ___ U.S. ___ (March 24, 2009). In this case the appellant sought to convince the courts that his counsel’s failure to advance a defense was ineffective. The issue revolves around the existence or potential existence of a…
Continue reading ›A change to Fed. R. Crim. Pro. recently adopted reminds me of a motion I file from time to time after the member’s have found my client guilty, or at the time the military judge asks if there is anything else before adjourning the court — that’s a Griffith motion. But first here is the…
Continue reading ›Here are a couple of CAAF grants of immediate interest to trial practitioners. No. 08-0808/AR. U.S. v. Derand M. DAVIS. CCA 20070808 (couldn’t see this on the Army public website). Review granted on the following issue: WHETHER TRIAL DEFENSE COUNSEL PROVIDED, TO THE SUBSTANTIAL PREJUDICE OF APPELLANT, INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL IN THE POST-TRIAL PHASE…
Continue reading ›David G. Savage, Who’s Policing the Fourth Amendment? Two cases push the unevenly enforced exclusionary rule closer to repealABA Journal, April 2009. Another writer musing on the potential demise of the Fourth Amendment as we thought we knew it.
Continue reading ›Here is a post from Prof. Colin Miller reminding us that hearsay within hearsay is still a potential objection to the contents of business records sought to be admitted under a Mil. R. Evid. 803 exception. Prof. Colin Miller, Layering Effect: Ninth Circuit Finds Public Record With Hearsay Within Hearsay Was Improperly Admitted, EvidenceProf blog,…
Continue reading ›Here is an interesting piece from Wired. Bruce Schneier, Security Matters, Wired, 26 March 2009. The piece talks about the challenges of maintaining privacy and a “Katz” level of privacy in an increasingly wired society. In the United States, the concept of “expectation of privacy” matters because it’s the constitutional test, based on the Fourth…
Continue reading ›Here’s a filler piece from Slate.Nina S. Rastogi, Murder, She Wrote: How forensic handwriting identification works, Slate, 26 March 2009.Here’s an interesting standard for expert testimony admissibility: According to the handful of studies on the subject, a trained examiner will be correct more often than a layman. One 1997 study asked both professionals and amateurs…
Continue reading ›A lot of times we get caught up in the need for an “expert” witness. If you have an expert witness the person is testifying under Mil. R. Evid. 702. True, the expert can “get-in” more information than other witnesses, but do you always need an expert. Federal Evidence blog reminds us that lay witnesses…
Continue reading ›Are you like me — you need to send or receive large files via email. If that’s the case — the law enforcement ROI, is a good example — here is a free, experimental way to transfer large files without having to send them by email. Most email accounts have size limits on what can…
Continue reading ›




