David Kocieniewski, Lawyer’s Ways Spelled Murder, U.S. Is Charging, NY Times, 20 May 2009.
He spent a decade as a top prosecutor, trying murder cases in New Jersey, drug cases in federal court and a wide range of offenses in the military justice system.
He went on to become one of the state’s most prominent defense lawyers, representing clients as varied as Abu Ghraib defendants,. . .
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Repeal, Don’t Defend:
In today’s WSJ, Brian Hughes, a former Army Ranger twice awarded the Commendation Medal, makes a powerful case for ending "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Last week saw the exoneration of the 132nd person from death row since 1973. Paul House, who was on death row for 22 years and was scheduled for a new hearing, was exonerated after a DNA test proved he was not the perpetrator of the murder he was convicted of in 1986. Daniel Wade Moore became the 133rd exoneree when he was acquitted at a retrial for a 2003 rape and murder. Given the vast amount of people released from death row in the last 35 years, it is clear that capital punishment in the United States is fatally flawed and there is the unconscionable possibility to execute an innocent person.
ACLU Blog of Rights.
CAAF has decided United States v. Collier, __ M.J. ___ (C.A.A.F. 2009).
This case presents the question whether the military judge erred in granting the government’s motion in limine prohibiting Appellant’s defense counsel from cross-examining HM2 C, the main Government witness, about an alleged homosexual romantic relationship between her and Appellant and from introducing any evidence of such a relationship.1 While the military judge did permit cross-examination about a close friendship, the defense that Appellant wanted to present was that HM2 C framed Appellant for larceny as a result of their romantic relationship ending badly. Because of this ruling, Appellant was free only to assert the motivation of an angry friend rather than a disappointed lover; as the Government then argued in its closing, the motivation of an angry, vengeful friend “strains all logic; it’s just not credible.”
The military judge’s ruling prevented Appellant’s counsel from fully exploring HM2 C’s bias and motive to misrepresent the truth, and precluded Appellant from presenting her theory of the case. Under the facts of this case, this was a violation of Appellant’s Sixth Amendment right to confront a witness against her.
Welcome to the real world.
Earl Kelly, Academy Justice Tilted Toward Women: Double Standard in Mid Sex Cases During Rempt Era, The (Annapolis) Capital, 17 May 2009.
This issue is not limited to the Naval Academy. This is a natural all too predictable outcome of the pendulum shift.
Here is a good case offered by Prof. Colin Miller, Under Construction: Ninth Circuit Resolves Interplay Between Rules Of Evidence 608 And 609, 17 May 2009.
As the 9th and Professor Miller note this was a close issue.
And here is another treatment of the case at FederalEvidence.blog,“Collateral Details” Of The Defendant’s Prior Conviction Results In Reversal.
Here is the Federal Register for CAAF rule changes.
Wisconsin (five days before Weaver) finds GPS tracking reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, but it is troubled by it and urges the legislature to limit it. State v. Sveum, 2009 Wisc. App. LEXIS 343 (May 7, 2009).
The New York Court of Appeals decided Weaver v. People, No. 53 (May 12, 2009), holding that the NY Constitution prohibits the use of GPS transmitters on vehicles without a warrant, following other state courts analyzing the issue under their constitutions.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog
