Close

Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog

Updated:

Bergdahl

On 27 August 2020, CAAF issued its opinion in United States v. Bergdahl. “Thus, simply stated, it was the totality of the circumstances surrounding Appellant’s misconduct rather than any outside influences that foreordained the Army’s handling and disposition of this case. Therefore, an objective, disinterested observer would not harbor any…

Updated:

The medical exception in evidence.

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…

Updated:

A lapse in time

Prof. Colin Miller brings us this note. Similar to its federal counterpart, Idaho Rule of Evidence 803(1) provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it. The first part of this “present sense impression” exception…

Contact Us
Start Chat