What, if anything, can you as military defense counsel do if you suspect some shenanigans during panel member deliberations? Military Rule of Evidence 606 states the basic rule against questioning the panel members during or after the trial about what went on during deliberations. Prohibited Testimony or Other Evidence. During…
If you have defended an assault case based on self-defense, you know that the alleged victim’s character for violence can be relevant. What about on direct? If your client knows of prior acts of violence then he may have a better argument that it was necessary to use, perhaps, more…
Prof. Colin Miller brings, The Admissibility of Statements Made to Doctors Consulted For the Purpose of Enabling Him/Her to Testify Federal Rule of Evidence 803(4) provides an exception the rule against hearsay for A statement that: (A) is made for — and is reasonably pertinent to — medical diagnosis or treatment; and (B) describes…
Wednesday, March 25, 2020 Batts & Sanger on Collecting Forensic Evidence in the Emergency Department By CrimProf BlogEditor Share Jayne J. Batts and Robert M. Sanger (affiliation not provided to SSRN and Santa Barbara College of Law) have posted Collecting Forensic Evidence in the Emergency Department: A Guide for Lawyers, Investigators, and Experts (American Journal of…
Cheng & Mannion on Forensic Reports and the Confrontation Clause By CrimProf BlogEditor Share Edward K. Cheng and Cara Mannion (Vanderbilt Law School and affiliation not provided to SSRN) have posted Unravelling Williams v. Illinois (NYU Law Review Online) on SSRN. Here is the abstract: Forensics are a staple of modern criminal trials, yet what restrictions…
Confirmation Bias and Other Systemic Causes of Wrongful Convictions: A Sentinel Events Perspective, By D. Kim Rossmo and Joycelyn M. Pollock. Their study suggests that 37% of wrongful convictions result from confirmation bias. Table 1: Causal Factors (≥ 10) Causal Factor Confirmation bias 37 Tunnel vision 24 High-profile crime/media attention…
No. 19-0051/AR. U.S. v. Korey B. Kangich. CCA 20170170. On consideration of the granted issue, 78 M.J. 304 (C.A.A.F. 2019), the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals, United States v. Kangich, No. 20170170 (A. Ct. Crim. App. Sep 27, 2018) (unpublished), and the opinion of this Court in United States v. McDonald, __ M.J. __ (C.A.A.F. Apr. 17, 2019), we conclude…
Like it or not, consistent or not consistent with long-held notions of justice, a military member accused of a sexual assault is presumed guilty. Sure command and others will say you are going to get a fair hearing and trial, but that’s not reality. Over 100 Law Professors, Others Call…
When a party objects to testimony or documents they should state “I object” and cite the evidence rule or principle and nothing else. You may be tempted, but don’t make a speaking objection. United States v. Gurfein, NMCCA 2019, is an example of why speaking objections are improper and can…
A case to look out for. United States v. Frost, No. 18-0362/AR Issue: Whether the military judge erred in admitting hearsay statements as prior consistent statements under Mil.R.Evid. 801(d)(1)(B)(i) where the defense theory posited the improper influence or motive preceded the allegedly consistent statements. Case Links: • ACCA opinion • Appellant’s brief…