Close

Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog

Updated:

Ambiguous request for counsel

Result – statements suppressed, and will be in the 9th because of Sessoms v. Runnels, No. 08-17790, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 17206 (9th Cir. 2012)  Wow.  What about Davis v. United States? Davis doesn’t apply because the ambiguous request came BEFORE the accused was advised of his Miranda rights.  So, why…

Updated:

The new privilege for victim-advocates does not apply

The new Mil. R. Evid. may not apply to any offense committed prior to it’s effective date?  Is there an argument that application to an offense prior to the effective date violates the ex-post facto clause.  See Calder v. Bull, 100 U.S. 1 (1798). Article I, section 9 of the…

Updated:

Bite mark evidence and testimony-defense resource

Occasionally there is a case involving bite mark evidence and testimony.  This type of testimony is subject to challenge under Houser.  Here I am talking about a case where the bite mark testimony goes to prove the identity of the accused. So, to that end the defense needs resources to…

Contact Us
Start Chat