Comment on Carissa Byrne Hessick, The Expansion of CP Law. 21 NEW CRIM. L. REV. (coming soon). As military defense counsel, we have had to deal with and address the “expansion” of CP into what is often referred to as erotica. Ms. Hessick notes an expansion of CP law to cover…
The “unit’ of possession for a CP prosecution is the container–a computer, a cellphone, or a plug-in drive, each is a separate unit. Everything in the one unit must be charged as only one specification. The Army Court of Criminal Appeals decided United States v. Mobley on 22 June 2018. This…
This Court unequivocally endorses the Supreme Court’s observation that “[f]ederal courts have an independent interest in ensuring that … legal proceedings appear fair to all who observe them.” Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153, 160, 108 S. Ct. 1692, 100 L. Ed. 2d 140 (1988). United States v. Boyce,…
I, currently, ask for the following as a minimal initial discovery request. Any and all adverse or negative information contained in the personnel files of any federal or state law enforcement agent who may have worked on this case in any manner. This includes but is not limited to Any…
Discovery Request 13 Aug 2012 Tripler Response to Discovery 20 Aug 2012 Supplement Discovery – Continuance Request 12 Sep 2012 Government Response to Discovery 16 Aug 2012 Gov Response to Defense Motion to Compel Discovery
https://www.court-martial-ucmj.com/files/2018/06/BS11-AFDTL-Shipment-Leakage-Study.pdf https://www.court-martial-ucmj.com/files/2018/06/BS12-Notification-Urinalysis-Cases.pdf https://www.court-martial-ucmj.com/files/2018/06/BS13-NDSL-Shipment-Leakage-Study.pdf
The Supreme Court decided Ortiz v. United States, an appeal from CAAF, today. Bottom line, This Court has jurisdiction to review the CAAF’s decisions. The judicial character and constitutional pedigree of the court-martial system enable this Court, in exercising appellate jurisdiction, to review the decisions of the court sitting at its…
Crime & Consequences blog has this story. The U.S. Supreme Court today took up Garza v. Idaho, No. 17-1026, involving the intersection of two recurring themes: lawyer decisions v. client decisions in the conduct of a case and how to apply rules developed for trials to the context of plea-bargained cases, which most cases…
My first GCM involved eyewitness identification and a motion to suppress based on an improperly suggestive show-up when the client was arrested. He was handcuffed in the back of the police car and the armed robbery victim was brought to the police car and asked ”is that him” or words…
From time to time I recommend articles, cases, or books to read that may be of interest and help to practitioners. Here are couple of plays to add to the mix, courtesy of Global Military Justice Reform blog, and I quote. Anthony Thommasini of The New York Timeshas written this strong and quite positive…