United States v. Filmore. 1. If a victim testifies on sentencing–the rules of evidence apply the same as any other witness. Article 6b does not waive the rules of evidence when a victim testifies in sentencing. (Note, the victim gave both sworn and unsworn statements.) Failure to follow the rules (even without defense objection) gets…
Continue reading ›Here’s how we start our “discovery” requests–as “Disclosure Requests.” The defense requests disclosure of the following items in advance of any UCMJ art. 32, preliminary hearing. The request is a continuing one in accordance with UCMJ arts. 32((a)(2)(D) and46; Rules 701, 703, 405(a), (e), (1), (f)(7), (h)(3)(A), Rules for Courts-Martial, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States…
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 ›Well, calls for change to the new changes for the prosecution of sex crimes have already begun. During the Conference over the NDAA FY 22, sexual harassment was removed from the list of covered offenses under the jurisdiction of a special trial counsel (STC). But, the President was tasked to enumerate an offense of sexual…
Continue reading ›The Inspector Rutledge detective stories are a favorite of mine. To quote an Amazon review: [T]he books are set in the period just after the First World War, and Inspector Rutledge is a veteran of said conflict. Even more unique, he’s haunted by the ghost of one of his subordinates, a corporal whom Rutledge had…
Continue reading ›From my very first opinion on this Court, I have consistently concluded that Mil.R.Evid. 410 must be applied broadly to be consistent with its purpose. United States v. Barunas, 23 M.J. 71, 75-76 (CMA 1986). See also Fed.R.Evid. 410. Speaking for the Court in Barunas, I said: The general purpose of Mil.R.Evid. 410 and its…
Continue reading ›NMCCA has decided United States v. Owens. The appellant asserts that the attorney-client relationship with his detailed trial defense counsel was terminated without good cause, leaving the appellant legally and factually without post-trial representation. The basis for the appellant’s claim is that substitute counsel failed to establish an attorney-client relationship with the appellant prior to…
Continue reading ›To stay out of trouble. To work hard for you clients. Labor Department employment statistics released Friday show that young veterans continue to have serious and growing problems finding work in a tight job market, while older veterans are doing better than the general population. Thanx, Marine Times.
Continue reading ›Waive it or raise it at work – and at a court-martial under the UCMJ. Judge Ed Carnes for the Eleventh Circuit in United States v. Rodriguez, No. 08-16696, Dec. 22, 2010: This case poses the question of whether there is a vindictive judge or cowardly counsel exception to the contemporaneous objection rule. Unless there…
Continue reading ›Navy Times reports: A cruiser skipper who was fired for cruelty and mistreatment of her crew will go before a Navy board of inquiry Tuesday that will recommend whether she can continue her Navy service. A Behanna update by Army Times: The Army Clemency and Parole Board in Arlington, Va., will review First Lt. Michael…
Continue reading ›
