Court-Martial Trial Practice

I found this interesting item on SCOTUSBlog.

If one goes to the “Frequently Asked Questions” page of the Supreme Court website, there is this question: “Where can I find the papers of the Justices?” Indeed. And here is the answer tendered: “The Biographical Directory of Federal Judges, maintained by the Federal Judicial Center, provides location information for the Justices’ papers. Search by the name of the Justice and then click on the link to ‘Research Collections’ to see where the papers are available. Many collections of papers are located at the Library of Congress and at academic and research institutions throughout the country. Depending upon the institution, some material may be available online.”

http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/08/accessing-the-papers-of-supreme-court-justices-online-other-resources/

What is the status of an accused being forced to divulge passwords on computers suspected of having contraband.

As an update in a recent case in which the government obtained an order compelling in individual to provide access to decrypted information on seized hard drives, In the Matter of The Decryption of a Seized Data Storage System (EDWI May 21, 2013) (No. 13-M-449), the government reported that it was able to decrypt some but not all of the data which has been used in support of an arrest warrant in the case

The Federal Evidence Blog has been following the few cases so far addressing whether theFifth Amendment may disallow efforts by the government to compel an individual to decrypt computer information. As one recent example, a court originally denied a government application to compel decryption under the Fifth Amendment, and then granted the ruling upon reconsidering additional information submitted in an ex parte application. See In the Matter of The Decryption of a Seized Data Storage System (EDWI May 21, 2013) (No. 13-M-449); See generally Compelling Access To Encrypted Information (Part II) (Jan. 30, 2012) (summarizing case). There is a new development in the case.

Filed today, a motion to vacate related to the “appointment” of an appellate judge by the Secretary of Defense: Judge Soybel

http://focustaiwan.tw/news/aipl/201308060021.aspx

This is somewhat off topic, but something military personnel deal with fairly regularly.

The Driver License Compact is an interstate agreement between 45 states to exchange information about license suspensions and traffic violations of non-residents, including DUI offenses. Its theme is “One Driver, One License, One Record.”

http://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2013/08/how-does-the-driver-license-compact-affect-duis.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Blotter+%28FindLaw+Blotter%29

I’ve done some work with Dr. Benjamin.

He’s directed me to a new blog worth following (it’s now in my Feedly).

Here’s the issue  de jour.

We are told so often it is nauseating how perfect the military drug labs are.  But then we read items like this about the Fort Meade lab.

Note, unlike the servicemembers who’s urine is screened the offending employees were put back in training and counseled on not lying.  If this were a military member in trouble they would be racking and stacking the charges like crazy.

CAAF continues to deal with cases where the terminal element in Art. 134 cases has not been plead.  While the cases are not being terminated, a number are visiting a local stop along the way.  Quite a few summary dispositions with:

On consideration of the petition for grant of review of the decision of the United States X Court of Criminal Appeals, and in view of United States v. Goings, 72 M.J.202 (C.A.A.F. 2013), and United States v. Gaskins, 72 M.J. 225 (C.A.A.F. 2013), it is ordered that said petition is granted on the following issue:

WHETHER THE ARMY COURT ERRED IN DETERMINING THE CHARGE SHEET AND GOVERNMENT CASE-IN-CHIEF REASONABLY PLACED APPELLANT ON NOTICE OF THE TERMINAL ELEMENT WHERE THE ONLY MENTION OF THE TERMINAL ELEMENT WAS DURING THE MILITARY JUDGE’S FINDINGS INSTRUCTIONS.

We all know and believe that DNA can be the smoking gun or the exclusion factor.  But, the NYTimes highlights some interesting issues about the reliability of DNA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/opinion/high-tech-high-risk-forensics.html?_r=0

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lawyer_gets_suspension_for_impersonating_college_acquaintance_on_lesbian_da/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=ABA+Journal+Top+Stories

Click to access 12-5038-1447998.pdf