A U.S. soldier in Iraqis accused of fatally shooting two other American service members and injuring a third after an argument in Iraq’s Anbar province last week, the military said.
Army Times reports.
A regional prison is opening at Fort Leavenworth, combining the operations of military prisons elsewhere in the United States.
The Joint Regional Confinement Facility will be operated by the Army Corrections Command. It’s located on the northeast Kansas post near the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks, the military’s maximum-security prison.
The U. S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Kentucky v. King.
QUESTION PRESENTED:
Police officers entered an apartment building in hot pursuit of a person who sold crack cocaine to an undercover informant. They heard a door slam, but were not certain which of two apartments the trafficker fled into. A strong odor of marijuana emanated from one of the doors, which prompted the officers to believe the trafficker had fled into that apartment. The officers knocked on the door. They then heard noises which indicated that physical evidence was being destroyed. The officers entered the
apartment and found large quantities of drugs. The Kentucky Supreme Court held that this evidence should have been suppressed, ruling that (1) the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement did not apply because the officers created the exigency by knocking on the door, and (2) the hot pursuit exception to the warrant requirement did not apply because the suspect was not aware he was being pursued. The two questions presented are: 1. When does lawful police action impermissibly "create" exigent circumstances which preclude warrantless entry; and which of the five tests currently being used by the United States Courts of Appeals is proper to determine when impermissibly created exigent circumstances exist? 2.Does the hot pursuit exception to the warrant requirement apply only
Thanks to crimeandconsequences.
United States v. Blazier was argued at CAAF and you can hear the oral argument at this link.
The U. S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Bullcoming v. New Mexico. Courtesy of CAAFLog here is the granted issue:
Whether the Confrontation Clause permits the prosecution to introduce testimonial statements of a nontestifying forensic analyst through the in-court testimony of a supervisor or other person who did not perform the laboratory analysis described in the statements.
NIMJ was able to send Charlie Fowler to monitor todays Article 39(a), UCMJ, session.
1. Trial is continued until 4 November 2010 from 13 October 2010. Not sure of the reason. It appears Mr. Jensen asked the judge to hold the case “in abeyance” pending resolution of an (untimely?) writ which has been filed with NMCCA. According to Charlie the defense said the reason for the potentially untimely filing was “for reasons I can’t get into right now[.]” Huuuuuuuum, this has resonance. I think I’ll try this one in a couple of weeks. (Note to DMLHS, this citation to authority has to be on the top ten this year.)
2. Unsurprisingly to those familiar with military justice the judge ruled the orders to be legal.
Disagreement arose todday among supporters of Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, the Army doctor facing military court-martial for refusing orders to deploy to Afghanistan after questioning Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility to be president.
A group of retired military officers organized as the Veterans Council and the United States Patriot Union in Sheridan, Wyo., issued a white paper calling on Lakin’s legal defense team to change strategy.
New York Times piece with a portion of video from Morlock’s confession.
Washington Post on the Ramrod Five.
A U.S. Army staff sergeant dreamed up a plan for fellow soldiers to kill three Afghan civilians this year because he was motivated by “pure hatred,” another soldier accused in the slayings has told investigators
The safeguardourconstitution website has a posting that a Writ of Mandamus has been filed with the Army Court of Criminal Appeals.
The site still lists the judges decision as pending.
A copy of the petition is not posted to the website.
News14 has this piece about the Fort Bragg christian rock concert that is drawing some attention.
Organizations have complained that a Christian rock concert should not be hosted by a government agency. Their stance is that it is a violation of separation of Church and State and displays a preferential treatment of a religion. However Army officials counter that it is a well settled Constitutional law for Chaplains in the Military to offer religious events.
Here is a WITN news link.
Thanks to a friendly reminder from CPT Josh Johnson, here is a link to this years JAA Appellate Advocacy Seminar.
For VA attorneys it is cheaper than CAAF’s annual seminar and you get more CLE credits because of the program handouts. Of course you may have to miss the last day of LTC Lakin’s trial.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog
