Yeager v. United States will be argued Monday at the Supreme Court. Under the doctrine of collateral estoppel, a prior court’s decision on an issue necessary to its judgment can preclude relitigation of that same issue in a future case. The Supreme Court held in Ashe v. Swenson (1970) that…
There's an interesting case going on in (southern California of course) where the defense is seeking to offer. Defense attorneys are for the first time submitting a controversial neurological lie-detection test as evidence in U.S. court.digg_url ="http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/03/noliemri.html"; In an upcoming juvenile-sex-abuse case in San Diego, the defense is hoping to…
United States v. Pitcher, 05-3182r, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 5103 (2d Cir. March 11, 2009). In this case appellant claimed IAC. He claimed on direct appeal that he wouldn't have plead not guilty, but for the overly rosy picture of his chances of success painted by his trial defense counsel. …
Entitled as a "shameless plug" Mike Navarre is moderating a 1.5 hr CLE tomorrow. Here, shamelessly, is the whole item lifted. Last chance to register for the on-line ABA-CLE tomorrow on Criminal Accountability for Civilians in the Battle Space. The program will cover the application of amended Art. 2(a)(10), UCMJ…
To qoute CAAFLog: Here's a link to NMCCA's unpublished opinion in Chessani, which it released today. Bottom line up front: the Government's appeal is denied.
AFCCA has put up a number of cases on their website, here are just a few. United States v. Taylor, ACM 37065 (March 12, 2009). A case worth reading where the MJ allowed speculative testimony about date rape drug use. Affirmed. United States v. Russell, ACM 37210 (March 12, 2009). …
Federal Evidence Review has put up a very good list of Supreme Court cases that impact evidence issues in a case. The list "includes constitutional, statutory, and Federal Rules of Evidence – based evidence-related cases." The list is by its nature discretionary and subject to change, but a useful reminder. …
No. 09-0185/AR. U.S. v. Makisha I. MORTON. CCA 20060458. Review granted on the following issue: WHETHER, AFTER FINDING THE EVIDENCE FACTUALLY INSUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT A FINDING OF GUILTY TO THE ADDITIONAL CHARGE AND ITS SPECIFICATION (FORGERY), THE ARMY COURT ERRED IN FINDING APPELLANT GUILTY OF A LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE ON…
Every so often the defense wants a co-accused to testify because they have something beneficial to say and they have already said it at the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing. As we know, the prosecution almost never willingly immunizes the witness, and judges don't always force the issue. (Odd how that…
Here is another resource via the Office of Defender Services, Legal, Policy & Training Division, Administrative Office of the Courts, Washington, DC. Immigration consequences of conviction.