Close

Articles Posted in Constitution

Updated:

Challenge MRE 311!

YOUR MILITARY DEFENSE COUNSEL SHOULD CHALLENGE THE APPLICATION OF THE MILITARY RULE OF EVIDENCE 311. THE RULE VIOLATES THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. WE ARE CHALLENGING THAT AT THE U. S. SUPREME COURT NOW. In many courts-martial, your military defense counsel will have to deal with evidence obtained from digital devices, like…

Updated:

Another bad day at CAAF for the Fourth Amendment.

Two recent decisions of  CAAF condone unlawful or bad practices when OSI, CID, NCIS, and CGIS search cellphones; United States v. Shields and United States v. Lattin. As a result, the MCIOs are unlikely to change their unlawful or bad practices. More than sloppy police work gets two passes because…

Updated:

Grazioplene redux

CNN reports, See also, https://connectingvets.radio.com/articles/retired-army-general-james-grazioplene-stand-trial-rape-charges-army-dismissed https://taskandpurpose.com/news/retired-army-general-rape-charges Retired Army Maj. Gen. James Grazioplene on Wednesday admitted to sexually abusing his then-teenage daughter in the 1980s, in exchange for a suspension of his sentence. His daughter, Jennifer Elmore, turned 49 on Wednesday. Grazioplene pleaded guilty in a Prince William County, Virginia, circuit…

Updated:

When process is due–you might get a little more

[D]istrict courts generally enjoy a fair amount of discretion in choosing the procedures they find most helpful for resolving pretrial motions, including whether to take the matter on the briefs, hear oral argument, or hold an evidentiary hearing. And often enough courts will choose to err on the side of granting more process than…

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…

Contact Us
Start Chat